> I'm already frustrated that we're stuck with "boolean" as the most fundamental of all data types. We do have another name for it. "Bit." You could probably r

> I'm already frustrated that we're stuck with "boolean" as the most fundamental of all data types. We do have another name for it. "Bit." You could probably roll out a new programming language today that uses something like `let shouldUpdate: bit = true;` or without blowing too much of your novelty budget. Or `u1`, if you wanted to allow arbitrary integer sizes.