![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Em Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 06:22:03PM +0000, Anton Altaparmakov escreveu: > At 17:42 24/01/02, Jeff Garzik wrote: > >Actually I prefer 'bool' to '_Bool', if this becomes a kernel standard. > I would be in favour of this as it does make code more readable. I use it > in ntfs tng quite a bit (but I just typedef a BOOL type myself). > > If it is added, then _please_ don't use '_Bool', that's just sick... > 'bool', heck even 'BOOL' would be better than that! I'd vote for bool, long are the days when I programmed COBOL in original 3270 terminals, heck it seems like it was in a previous life 8) /me scratches head, I should go back and update the kernel janitor TODO list with this... - Arnaldo - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 12:15 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||