AutoHotkey Community

[Chris]

Although AutoHotkey does not have a boolean data type (since all variables are stored as strings), having the words true and false as built-in constants might improve the readability of scripts. For example:

UseStandardMenu = Y
CaseSensitive =

Could be written instead as:
UseStandardMenu := true
CaseSensitive := false
(Note that the above must use the colon-equals operator to avoid percent signs around true/false)

Internally, true and false would be stored as 1 and 0, so it wouldn't be too much of a help when using the View menu's "List Variables". But it might be worth something.

The only drawback I see to adding them is the breaking of a few existing scripts that already use them as variable names. However, that is mitigated by the fact that the syntax checker would display an error when such scripts are loaded, making it easy to revise them.

Comments are welcome. Thanks for voting.

[Rajat]

though i didn't very much like the language of 'I strongly disagree' but that's what i voted... well i think its not too much benefit compared to the points against it.
_________________

[Nemroth]

I think it can be a good thing, but not a necessity. For me it can be implemented but with a low priority.

[jonny]

I think this is just short of necessary, since the most common use of variables is a simple on/off indicator. I think it's really cool to finally have a standard proposed for this, as boolean values should be separated from string values for both readability and practicality.

[Chris]

Great comments so far. More are welcome and appreciated.

[corrupt]

I think it may make code a bit easier to read.

True = 1 or -1
False = 0

?

[Chris]

Currently, false is any variable that is empty or that contains 0 or 0.0. True is everything else, including 1, -1, or any other string.

However, when you assign true to a variable, or when an expression evaluates to true such as (1 > 0), the result will always be 1. This is done for consistency and also because it's traditional.

[Chris]

Well, it's currently 4 to 1 in favor of the idea. Note that I do not vote in these polls, but if I were to vote in this one I would probably prefer it too.

If anyone has any more comments, feel free to post them. Also, I'll wait a few more days for more votes to come in.

Thanks.

[Rajat]

though i don't plan to change my scripting ways due to this change, it seems fine if it doesn't break my existing scripts.
_________________

[Chris]

I think the only ones that would be broken are those that use the words true and false as variable names. Even those will not be broken in a bad way because the syntax checker will alert you the moment you launch such a script.

Still, breaking scripts is never a good thing. I feel it is only warranted when there is a significant benefit, which is what this poll is trying to find out.

[JSLover]

[Chris]

Yes, the shorthand method such as "if Done" will still correctly check whether Done is true or false. You would also be able to write "if (Done = true)" if you prefer the long method.

[deguix]

(Hmmm... ignore this post because I forgot that you wanted to do like: var1 := true so I agree)
_________________
Working now on:
NSIS Wiki (NSIS)

[hh]

it clearly improves code readability.
i can't really see any disadvantages - not any that matter to me anyways.

so, my vote was a clear yes.

[Chris]

True and False exist as built-in variables in the latest version. Thanks for all the votes and comments.