TM> Now  the code looks like what a human (me!) thinks when writing it. On
TM> a compiler worth its  money,  the  resulting  object  code  should  be
TM> exactly the same (if False and True are reasonably defined).
    False is easy to define: zero. True can never be reasonably defined
    without an actual operation being done: since true is only defined
    as not zero.
    True = inval & -1;
    This assumes that a negative one is stored as all ones, ofcourse, and
    True must be calculated for every inval given to it. It would have
    been so much easier if true was actually defined somewhere.
--- GEcho 1.00
---------------