ericjlindholm

Boolean False vs Null Indication Fields, which do u prefer and y?

Discussion created by ericjlindholm on Oct 13, 2017
Latest reply on Oct 22, 2017 by keywords

This is likely minutia and the answer is probably pick one and stick with it. 

 

background:

I call these fields indicators or "is" fields.  I name them like isCustomer, isVendor.  It keeps them all nicely grouped in alpha order and read well for me in code.  for example.

 

if [ people::isVendor ]

if [ not people::isCustomer]

 

Because most script steps and functions see both, null and false as false, I don't run into too many issues with this. I did recently with an extend found set where one condition was that a valve be null.  I was using a boolean toggle that was

set field [people::isVendor ; not isVendor] to toggle the boolean.  that script step reads more clearly to me than

set field [people::isVendor ; if( people::isVendor ; 1 ; "" )

 

but I in a find, = and 0 do not return the same results  (unless there is a way  to find both. )

 

I need to choose to autofill a false boolean field with a 0 or script all my toggles to be sure to set a null instead of not. 

 

One minor point for using the null is that my most used value list that only contains 1 for checkboxes natively leaves a null when checked and unchecked. 

 

I am guessing that using a null will get slightly better performance and using the false will be a little easier to code.  That being the case, I choose the negligible performance gain I guess. 

 

and you?

 

Thanks for indulging me!

Outcomes