On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> >> Recently introduced "bool".
> >
> >I haven't seen the new definition of "bool", but it can't possibly provide
> >a strong distinction between integers and booleans. That is, if x is
> >declared as an integer rather than as a bool, the compiler won't complain
> >about "if (x) ...".
>
> Only Java will get you this distinction.
Not true. It exists in Ruby. :-)
> I would be comfortable with a
> feature where conditionals (like if() and ?:) enforce a bool showing
> up in C/C++, but it's not easy to get into the mainline gcc.
I think relying on an agreed-upon convention is the best we can do.
Alan Stern
-
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/
[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]
