Thank you for that explanation, it does make sense, you're right :-)
From the reading-and-understanding-code point of view, however, it
might have been better to have it the other way round. In everyday
language (= everyday logic), a NOT clause is used pretty often, and
failing (error) is
in fact nothing is unlogical ... it's the gambas way...
in gambas an error, impossibility, return true... in all the function
that return a boolean
you can imagine to write this in that way
CONST bError as Boolean =True
if .MoveChild = bError then ...
its the same !
in another way it limit
Just one question for understanding it better:
Why is e. g. MoveNext or MoveChild TRUE in case there is NOTHING and not
vice-versa? Seems pretty unlogical and looks somewhat strange in code...
Regards
Rolf
--
Register
