I thought it was

IIF(lExp <> .T. <> .F.,.T.=.F.,.T.=.T. AND .F.=.F.)

>No, intended code was

IIF(lExp <> .T. <> .F.,.F.,.T.)

>
>>As others have pointed out the syntax is stupid. They obviously meant:

IIF (lExp <> .t.,.f.,.t.)

>>
>>>Is there any reason to use
>>>

iif(lExp, .t., .f.)

>>>instead of lExp itself? The values this iif() returns are identical to the value of lExp.
>>>
>>>I wonder who invented this redundant way of writing it. I've seen it a hundred times, and still don't get it, why would anyone write it that way. Just like
>>>

if lExpr = .t.

>>>is identical to
>>>

if lExpr