Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 24 Jan 2002 17:34:43 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 24 Jan 2002 17:34:34 -0500 Received: from tapu.cryptoapps.com ([63.108.153.39]:37817 "EHLO tapu.f00f.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 24 Jan 2002 17:34:25 -0500 Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 14:33:25 -0800 From: Chris Wedgwood To: Jeff Garzik Cc: Linux-Kernel list Subject: Re: RFC: booleans and the kernel Message-ID: <20020124223325.GA886@tapu.f00f.org> In-Reply-To: <3C5047A2.1AB65595@mandrakesoft.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3C5047A2.1AB65595@mandrakesoft.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.26i X-No-Archive: Yes Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 12:42:58PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: A small issue... Which has spawn a bug ugly thread filled with opinions and other stuff hardly relevant :) 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? It seems everyone is discussing code efficiency and such like.... How about we just assume that whether we use if(bool) or if(int) the compiler produces euqally good and bad code --- I see no evidence to suggest otherwise. I don't want to argue over correctness here, too many people already have. Surely what is left to discuss was Jeff's original email --- do people mind the use of this, does it make the source mode readable? Arguably, I think it does. It certainly doesn't make it less readable. --cw - 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/