The Is Operator

[Kyle G.]

Walter Bright wrote:
> Kyle G. wrote:
>> Is there any special reason why we are unable to do "var isnot null" 
>> or "var is not null"?
> 
> It all depends on what the meaning of "is" is.

That sounds like quote from a US politician.

And so without 'is,' ...

In this context, the first 'is' attempts to discern whether their exists 
a known accepted justification for the usage of "!is" as opposed to 
something potentially cleaner and easier to read.

It appears the justification which has been applied here follows that an 
extra keyword in the language would not be necessary when existing 
language keywords suffice.