Re: Why is it not possible to use "nil" any more in init files ?

[Phillip Lord]

Alexandre Oberlin <email_via_web@migo.info> writes:
> On top of that, not having the explicit arguments work as once expected does
> not help. Really, ain’t it a bit confusing to have
> (cua-mode -1)
> return nil and
> (cua-mode nil)
> return t ?

Only if you actually do this. For instance,

(cua-mode -1)
(cua-mode 1)

works just fine and as expected.

Or even 

(cua-mode 0)
(cua-mode 1)

Bottom line is that nil in lisp is overloaded. In this case,
it means both "explicit false" and "no argument supplied".

Life is a compromise, nil double so.

Phil