Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 04:14:09 +0000 From: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> Cc: Mike Meyer <mwm-dated-1015831171.a21ab0@mired.org>, obrien@FreeBSD.ORG, Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@FreeBSD.ORG>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: RFC: style(9) isn't explicit about booleans for testing. Message-ID: <20020307041409.B29816@chiark.greenend.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <88752.1015400044@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> wrote: > >I had a discussion with Eric Allman about this very thing recently >where he advocated "everything inside if, while, for and so on should >be true booleans". > >Now, IFF the C language had a type called "boolean" that would make >a lot of sense. > >Unfortunately, it does not (at present ?) have a boolean type, and >while one could simulate it with typedefs, there is no way to get >the compiler to enforce the rule. C99 has a boolean type, but neither the comparison operators nor the logical operators nor the ! operator return a bool, and conditional contexts (like if, while, ?:) don't expect a bool. Pretty useless, really. Tony. -- f.a.n.finch <dot@dotat.at> ROCKALL: WEST BACKING SOUTHWEST 6 TO GALE 8, OCCASIONALLY SEVERE GALE 9 AT FIRST, DECREASING 5 FOR A TIME. OCCASIONAL RAIN. MODERATE. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020307041409.B29816>