[lkml]   [2002]   [Jan]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: RFC: booleans and the kernel
Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Oliver Xymoron wrote:
> > On Thu, 24 Jan 2002, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > > 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].
> >
> > Unlikely. The compiler can already figure this sort of thing out from
> > context.
> X, true, and false are of type int.
> If one tests X==false and then later on tests X==true, how does the
> compiler know the entire domain has been tested? With a boolean, it

Why would anyone want to write if (X==false) or if (X==true) ?
It is the "beginner's mistake" way of writing code. Then people learn,
and write if (X) or if (!X). Comparing to true/false is silly.
Nobody writes if ( (a==b) == true) so why do it in the simpler cases?

> would. Or a switch statement... if both true and false are covered,
A switch statement on a boolean value is stupid. Use if - there
is only two cases.

Helge Hafting
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:0.042 / U:2.864 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site