As the docs say, it should (and they should evaluate to true).
Easily fixable, but a comment in the code notes that the "bool"
conditional should be kept in step - and the docs for *that*
require that a negative number is an expansion failure:
> It parses “true”, “false”, “yes” and “no” (case-insensitively); also
> positive integer numbers map to true if non-zero, false if zero. An
> empty string is treated as false. Leading and trailing whitespace is
> ignored; thus a string consisting only of whitespace is false. All
> other string values will result in expansion failure.
The options seem to be
1) Don't fix 1005; change the definition of "condition =" and
change the docs.
2) Fix 1005, and live with the mismatch in definitions of condiotonals
3) Fix both 1005 and "bool{<string>}" and change the docs of the latter.
Opinions?
--
Cheers,
Jeremy
