Re: Rationale behind conversion of a nil prefix arg to numeric 1

[tomas]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Mon, Sep 05, 2016 at 10:02:02PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
> > From: Andreas Röhler <andreas.roehler@online.de>
> > Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2016 20:41:22 +0200
> > 
> > Leaving out the argument with uppercased P, it sends nil --correct-- 
> > whose numeric value is considered 1 again.
> > 
> > Understand it might be considered a feature, but think the caused 
> > inconsistency weights in more.
> 
> So you also disagree with nil meaning "the default value", do you?

Alternatively, for Andreas the axiom "the default value is always 0"
holds ;-P

(no offense meant, but I just couldn't... resist ;-)

regards
- -- t
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlfOa9cACgkQBcgs9XrR2kaU1gCeNN4AKiZGn5fvhGLgBcwpYX43
exEAnjSe6SGxVEY6E4RsiMV5lW53Ryyp
=T1bW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----