From: Damien Fisher (damien_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-08-04 20:29:09
On Mon, 5 Aug 2002, Andrew J Bromage wrote:
> The problem is that while tribools have a well-understood calculus,
> they are suited to many varied interpretations. Calling the third
> value "unknown", "undefined", "maybe", "bottom" or whatever sounds
> to me like calling your floating point type "length" or "probability".
> Unfortunately, I don't think there is a better name, so I'm not
> going to argue with whatever is chosen.
How about "nonboolean"?
Of course, this doesn't generalize to "higher order" types like
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk