On 5/8/21 12:58, Paul "LeoNerd" Evans wrote: > I don't yet have a good thought about "no", but since PL_sv_yes carries > its own stringification PV, it's possible that sv_setsv could notice > it's that special value and store it as-is, with SvLEN == 0, into the > target. So it's now possible to distinguish any true bool value, by > > SvIV(sv) == 1 && SvPVX(sv) == SvPVX(&PL_sv_yes) That would impede one for having boolean dualvars. Programmers may want to have booleans that stringify as True/False, T/F, Yes/No, 1/0, or the current 1/"". Actually, I would say the current PL_sv_no stringification ("") is not the one the programmer needs in most cases.Thread Previous | Thread Next