NOT operator like AndAlso/OrElse?

[Imortis]

AndAlso and OrElse are not bitwise like AND and OR. They function like boolean operators, and even return Booleans when used with Boolean values.

Should we have something similar for NOT?

Not is currently a bitwise compliment. Should we have a not operator that always returns a -1 or 0 (TRUE or FALSE)? If so, what do we call it? ButNot?

[dkl]

You could say that "= 0" or "= false" is that operator. That's what I ended up doing anyways.

[Imortis]

You could say that "= 0" or "= false" is that operator. That's what I ended up doing anyways.

Sure, that is an easy work around. I was just curious if it would be a good idea to have something similar to the short-circuit ops to be consistent.

[MrSwiss]

How about (single line) macros:

Code: Select all

#Define IsFalse(e)  ( Not CBool(e) )
#Define IsTrue(e)   ( CBool(e) )

They check whether 'expression' is: True/False ... ( IsFalse() is IMHO, more 'telling', than IsNot() )