On 28 Jun 99, at 9:24, Ansley, Michael wrote:
> >>> If I may add, I always found the practice of comparing boolean values
> to
> >>> "true" or to "false" rather funny. You take a boolean value, and
> compare it
> >>> to 'true'. You get a boolean result that is the same:
> >>>
> >>> Truth table of "new" = 't':
> >>>
> >>> new new = true
> >>> true true
> >>> false false
> >>>
> >>> So... isn't it just slightly more reasonable to use:
> >>>
> >>> SELECT * from chargehistory WHERE "new";
This may be slightly more reasonable. :-)
But ideally one would like to say:
SELECT * from chargehistory WHERE "new" is TRUE;
No? :-)
> Definitely. However, if you ever use something like Visual Basic, you
> learn the hard way not to do this, because it doesn't have a native
> boolean type. It tries to hack an integer into a boolean, and hacks the
> bitwise AND, OR, and NOT operators to perform like logical ones. This
> works great most of the time, but to find it when it isn't working is a
> nightmare.
>
> Of course, in a real environment, where programs work like they should,
> this shouldn't happen.
>
> MikeA...
>
>
