184

submitted 2 weeks ago by The_Picard_Maneuver@lemmy.world to c/memes@lemmy.world

33 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] spooky2092 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Because nothing isn't something, and something is true. It's base Boolean logic where everything is either true or false. Null/nothing is false.

It's a weird way to think about conditionals, but it makes sense when you use them in real examples. In my case, I use them like this when I need to make sure that a variable has a value. So I can do something like

If(variable){do things with the variable}else{do stuff when the variable doesn't exist}

[-] Ziglin@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

I understand that, it makes sense. But why does it not throw an error? The parameter is missing after all.

[-] takeda@lemm.ee 2 points 1 week ago

Actually the explanation is wrong.

not()

is actually

not ()

not is a keyword not a function.

Boolean of empty tuple is False and then not negates it.

I explained it better here:

https://lemm.ee/post/61594443/19783421

[-] Ziglin@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

That makes a lot more sense, thanks I did see in the syntax highlighting that it was a keyword but forgot that none of them took parameters.

[-] spooky2092 1 points 1 week ago

No it's not, "" (a null/empty string) is the parameter. Not every function needs a parameter to be valid, and negation is one of them. Negating nothing is something, so "not()" = "not(null)" = "not(false)" = "true"