DMD 0.148 release

[bobef]

Derek Parnell wrote:
> 
> Zero is frequently used to implement the concept of falsehood and 
> likewise non-zero for truth, however the semantics of integers is not 
> the same as the semantics of booleans. But because many C programers are 
> just *so* used to thinking this way they have become to believe that 
> zero *is* falsehood rather than just a number chosen to implement the 
> concept.
> 

Just thoughts...

Well back in school we were learning boolean algebra. (for some 
electrical crap... I don't remember... I don't care...). Even if we take 
just the name 'boolean algebra' it means it used for calculations, which 
means it is number not falsehood... After all it used for all these 
logical operators which operate with numbers not falsehood... If we say 
it is not calculations and it is logical operations, well it is not, 
else it would be only true, false, if a to b is false and c to b is true 
then a to c is ... this kind of stuff. But it is actually used for 
numbers and calculations, because 01101010<<0202 is not logic anymore it 
is mathematics which is also logic but other kind than true/false, logic 
for the quantity of things not their rightness...
And one more thing. If it is falsehood indeed, then it is something 
abstract. Technically speaking True and False have any meaning only in 
the context of each other, i.e. in the context of some logic, system or 
whatever, not in the context of numbers. So how are you going to convert 
from number to falsehood? This would limit us to writing only bool 
a=true || bool a=false, which seems annoying to me. bool a=1 is shorter 
;]. Plus there will be no if(a), if(b), because a is always true or 
always false by itself, it should relate to something else to be right 
or wrong, so we will always have to write if(a==1), if(b==null) instead, 
so I like it this way ;]

Am I talking nonsese? :)