[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <44CFCA98.4080400@zytor.com>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2006 14:41:44 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
CC: ricknu-0@...dent.ltu.se, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
Vadim Lobanov <vlobanov@...akeasy.net>,
Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de>,
Shorty Porty <getshorty_@...mail.com>,
Peter Williams <pwil3058@...pond.net.au>,
Michael Buesch <mb@...sch.de>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>, larsbj@...lik.net,
Paul Jackson <pj@....com>,
Josef Sipek <jsipek@....cs.sunysb.edu>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd.bergmann@...ibm.com>,
Nicholas Miell <nmiell@...cast.net>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Lars Noschinski <cebewee@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] include/linux: Defining bool, false and true
Jeff Garzik wrote:
> H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> ricknu-0@...dent.ltu.se wrote:
>>> This patch defines:
>>> * a generic boolean-type, named "bool"
>>> * aliases to 0 and 1, named "false" and "true"
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@...dent.ltu.se>
>>
>> Shouldn't this simply use _Bool?
>
> No sane person should use "_Bool" in real code. Unnecessary StudlyCaps
> and unnecessary underscore.
>
> "bool" is far easier to type, and looks less weird.
>
That wasn't the point. The point was that bool should be a typedef to
_Bool instead of an enum.
-hpa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists