>Well the same argument goes for 1 as well as for -1! Regardless of the number of bytes used to store a logical
>value, NOT 0 equals 1 (even if not bitwise NOT). One important reason may be that with 1 as TRUE, eventually,
>a logical value could be stored on only one bit (which would not be possible with -1).

>Vlad

>>I'm not sure why you're surprised. C++ does use a non-zero value positive integer, 1. VB, OTOH, uses -1. The latter I can understand because regardless of the number of bytes, the bitwise compliment (NOT 0, or in VFP BITNOT(0)) of 0 (False) will be -1. Defining True recursively as NOT False makes more sense to me than defining it independently.

I still think it's a big mistake to assume that TRUE & FALSE have numeric values. The nature of computers is that they have to be stored in bits & bytes, it is how they are interpreted, a 4 byte floating point number could be looked at as represented by 4 single byte integers, but no one would really consider doing that, so why discuss the integer value of logical representations ? 0 just happens to be a convenient representation for FALSE, allowing use of processor flags, but there is no reason why this should be the case.

Regards
Mike