[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:0.063 / U:21.968 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site