[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:0.039 / U:190.732 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site