Re: [boost] 3-state boolean type

From: Rob Stewart (stewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-08-02 16:00:06

From: "Victor A. Wagner, Jr." <vawjr_at_[hidden]>
> At Friday 2002/08/02 07:40, you wrote:
> >On Friday 02 August 2002 10:15 am, Rob Stewart wrote:
> > > I agree with the sentiments regarding the name.  Of those suggested thus
> > > far, I like tristate.
> >
> >The reason I don't like 'tristate' is that it doesn't convey anything about
> >what the 3 states are. I think we have to have 'bool' in the name somewhere
> >to make it obvious that true and false are two of the states and that the
> >type acts like a boolean.

I suppose that's legitimate, but if tristate has the "if (b) else if (!b) else"
semantics you've defined, I don't see how it's a problem.  Indeed, if you can
assign a tristate from a bool, then you have, effectively, {true, false,
unknown} without needing to make "true" and "false" explicit members of the set
of values.

> tool        (bool == binary ool, tool  == ternary ool)

Sadly, "bool" is short for "Boolean."  However, doesn't that lead to "tern" as
the appropriate abbreviation?

> trool       (for those who think tool could be mis-understood, and those 
> who realize that 'trit' was the only socially acceptable contraction for 
> ternary digit)

LOL!

> troolean (or worse, spelled: truelean)
> trillian     (in honor of the maths & astrophysics co-traveller of Zaphod)

Now you're just getting slap happy!

-- 
Rob Stewart                           stewart_at_[hidden]
Software Engineer                     http://www.sig.com
Susquehanna International Group, LLP  using std::disclaimer;