Val Does Not Work on Zero

[Dare2]

@Dare2: Being frustrated doesn't mean I need any help, mate. That's a direct personal insult on me which I find judgemental and offensive in the extreme. It's time like this that make me really understand why Danilo quit the forums.

Yes, it was directly aimed at you. First ever post where I have done this and it felt quite good. It also felt good to know I could do this without you spitting the dummy and locking the thread (as you have done to me and to others, even when you were not the recipient of the preceding posts).

Point being, if you want people to be polite to you, be polite to them. If you get personal and act like a pork chop, accept that others can as well - and if you don't like it when directed at you (as I just demonstrated) then consider that others might not like it when you direct it at them.

[PB]

Well, I didn't get personal with Alex at all. I just got frustrated with trying to
explain the situation. If you look at my posts, I went to great calm lengths to
explain Val, including with detailed code snippets and references to the docs.
It was only after that that I said "RTFM" and asked someone else to help me
get my point across. Never did I say Alex needed psychiatric help or anything
personal like you did to me. Besides, getting frustrated does not mean one
needs help -- it just means you're normal. You've never raised your voice to
anyone in your life? THAT'S not normal. But it's over now; I've apologised
to Alex via PM (he can verify) and we'll both just move on.

(Re: Locking the thread -- I haven't been a mod for some time now, which
I guess you hadn't noticed? We're all on equal footing here, thus was this
entire topic).

[Dare2]

(Re: Locking the thread -- I haven't been a mod for some time now, which I guess you hadn't noticed? We're all on equal footing here, thus was this entire topic).

Had noticed, hence the reference to it being "safe" to take a shot a you. Which (to my discredit) I still feel like doing. So I'd better bow out now.

[PB]

> Which (to my discredit) I still feel like doing

Doesn't matter.

[Alex]

I'm verifying. PB and I are fine.

Alex

[Kale]

I've woken up now and i want to clarify one point.

Code: Select all

Val("0")

This code does NOT return false. It returns the numeric value of the literal string passed. Which in Purebasic just so happens to be what it uses as a false value.

Doing something like this:

Code: Select all

A$ = "0"
If A$
...

Is entriely valid IMO because you could use 'Val()' in this way to test a that a string contains a number that isn't '0'.

[Dare2]

lol.

Some of the posts on this thread have been sanitised.

[Berikco]

Damn, im to late

[Dare2]

[Alex]

I've woken up now and i want to clarify one point. :)

Code: Select all

Val("0")

This code does NOT return false. It returns the numeric value of the literal string passed. Which in Purebasic just so happens to be what it uses as a false value.

Pardon me for beating a dead horse, but doesn't this mean that any keyword operation that returns the number 0, even if completely accurate mathematically, also returns false?

Alex

[Kale]

Pardon me for beating a dead horse, but doesn't this mean that any keyword operation that returns the number 0, even if completely accurate mathematically, also returns false?

Yes, because Purebasic uses the number '0' as a false value due to the lack of any real boolean data type. Conversely Purebasic uses the value '1' for true. But in the case of 'If' statements any other value than '0' is true.

[netmaestro]

crap, all the fun stuff is cleaned up

[PB]

> Some of the posts on this thread have been sanitised

[blueznl]

Frankly, most people have forgotten the issue since then

[Zach]

Holy 5 years ago, Batman