On Mon, Jan 12, 2026 at 5:17 PM Sebastian Wittmeier wrote:
>
> or even better
>
> return false if ();


Yeah scrap my idea of "return if !".

If you want to return the original value unchanged, then do:

    return if SomeFunction();

And if you want to invert the value, then do:

    return false if SomeFunction();

which would be equivalent to:

    decltype(SomeFunction()) x = SomeFunction();
    if ( static_cast<bool>(x) ) return !x;

We could debate whether or not this should be permitted for types
other than "void" and "bool" and pointers. I think it would be fine
for integer types (i.e. return 'false' would be return zero). And as
for user-defined types, well let the author of the class do what they
want with their user-defined operator!.

Yeah I think "return false if" is good.