Russell Parker
My feedback
4 results found
-
32 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Russell Parker supported this idea · -
3 votesRussell Parker supported this idea ·Russell Parker shared this idea ·
-
3 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Russell Parker commentedYou are correct about it taking a bit to wrap ones head around, however there is likely a reason for it. I am guessing this is because properties default to "False" since 0 is nice and unambiguous. Since the generally desired behavior is to have the field be Visible the property gets implemented as "Hidden" since "Hidden=0" causes the field to be Displayed/Shown.
I used to do Technical Support for an Enterprise ITAM application and the was a Field Property called "Irrelevant". By default is was False and Irrelevant=False is... well... Relevant. Had to explain that double negative many times. What it comes down to is programmatically testing again False is cleaner and more bullet proof than testing against true. In just about every language/system I have worked with False=0, but I have seen True be defined in a variety of ways. Everything from True=1, True=-1, to the most entertaining version which is True=Not(False). Anyway... just some thoughts about why the Negative/Opposite logic is not just capricious or crazy. :)
-
3 votesRussell Parker shared this idea ·
Would open up a whole new set of possibilities.