[lkml]   [2002]   [Jan]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: RFC: booleans and the kernel
Followup to:  <>
By author: Jeff Garzik <>
In newsgroup:
> A small issue...
> C99 introduced _Bool as a builtin type. The gcc patch for it went into
> cvs around Dec 2000. Any objections to propagating this type and usage
> of 'true' and 'false' around the kernel?
> Where variables are truly boolean use of a bool type makes the
> intentions of the code more clear. And it also gives the compiler a
> slightly better chance to optimize code [I suspect].
> Actually I prefer 'bool' to '_Bool', if this becomes a kernel standard.

Noone is actually meant to use _Bool, except perhaps in header files.

#include <stdbool.h>

... then use "bool", "true", "false".

This is fine with me as long our version of stdbool.h contain the
appropriate ifdefs.

<> at work, <> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot." <>
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:15    [W:0.137 / U:24.104 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site