(edit: apols for the formatting; google ate my images - have replaced with source, but raw)
I’ve been quiet for a little while, due to general fatigue, changing job etc – but after a holiday I’m back refreshed and renewed.
So let’s start with a fun edge condition, inspired by my colleague balpha, who asked me “does C#/.NET/LINQ guarantee false < true?”.
So, is it?
I’m leaving LINQ aside, as for anything other than LINQ-to-Objects, all bets are off; so let’s just limit ourselves to C#; in that case the answer is pretty simple, “yes”.
IComparable<bool> such that this will always work. But not all .NET is C# ;p So how can we be evil here?
What is a boolean, anyways?
First, we need to understand that (in common with many runtimes/languages) the CLI doesn’t really know much about booleans – under the hood they are treated pretty-much the same as integers, with special treatment for “zero” and “not zero”. That means that technically we aren’t restricted to the expected values – it is simply that C# handles all the logic to make sure you only get sane values. But we can write our own IL – here I’m using
DynamicMethod to create a
bool with underlying value 2:
// write an evil non-C# function that returns something
// unexpected for a bool (but legal IL)
var dm = new DynamicMethod("mwahaha", typeof(bool), null);
var il = dm.GetILGenerator();
var func = (Func<bool>)dm.CreateDelegate(typeof(Func<bool>));
var superTrue = func();
The first thing to note is that you shouldn’t do this. So what does such a beast do? The first thing to note is that at first glance it appears to work as expected:
// is it true/false?
Console.WriteLine(superTrue); // prints: true
Console.WriteLine(!superTrue); // prints: false
// and does it *equal* true/false?
Console.WriteLine(superTrue == true); // prints: true
Console.WriteLine(superTrue == false); // prints: false
so the non-zero / zero handling is just like we expect? Well, no. The compiler isn’t helping us here, as it spots the constants. However, if we compare to variables, it uses the underlying value:
bool normalTrue = bool.Parse("true"), normalFalse = bool.Parse("false");
Console.WriteLine(superTrue == normalTrue); // prints: false
Console.WriteLine(superTrue == normalFalse); // prints: false
bool.Parse here to avoid the compiler getting clever)
We could postulate that this “super-true” is more than “true”, or maybe we might suppose the implementation is going to just treat it as true. In fact, neither is correct – the implementation of
CompareTo (testing in .NET 4) means that it simply breaks:
// how about sorting...
Console.WriteLine(superTrue.CompareTo(true)); // prints: 1
Console.WriteLine(true.CompareTo(superTrue)); // prints: 1 - oops!
That is going to make sorting very painful.
So what is your point?
Well, the first thing to note is that I haven’t disproven the original question; as far as I can tell, false is always less than true. However, you can get some very bizarrely behaved booleans. You would have to be crazy to deliberately introduce such shenanigans into your code, but it is something to perhaps at least know about as part of defensive programming / data sanitization – I’m fairly sure you could cause some nasty effects by passing 17 in as a
bool to a few places…