Re: [PATCH 1/2] include/linux: Defining bool, false and true

Jeff Garzik wrote:

H. Peter Anvin wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

This patch defines:
* a generic boolean-type, named "bool"
* aliases to 0 and 1, named "false" and "true"

Signed-off-by: Richard Knutsson <[email protected]>

Shouldn't this simply use _Bool?

No sane person should use "_Bool" in real code. Unnecessary StudlyCaps and unnecessary underscore.

"bool" is far easier to type, and looks less weird.

That wasn't the point. The point was that bool should be a typedef to _Bool instead of an enum.

	-hpa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [PATCH 1/2] include/linux: Defining bool, false and true
    • From: Jeff Garzik <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [PATCH 0/2] A generic boolean-type
    • From: [email protected]
  • [PATCH 1/2] include/linux: Defining bool, false and true
    • From: [email protected]
  • Re: [PATCH 1/2] include/linux: Defining bool, false and true
    • From: "H. Peter Anvin" <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 1/2] include/linux: Defining bool, false and true
    • From: Jeff Garzik <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: tickle NMI watchdog on serial output.
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 1/2] include/linux: Defining bool, false and true
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 1/2] include/linux: Defining bool, false and true
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 1/2] include/linux: Defining bool, false and true
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]