lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 14:58:28 +0100
From: Darren J Moffat <Darren.Moffat@...cle.COM>
Subject: Re: [PHC] C99 in reference implementations

On 08/13/13 03:49, Marsh Ray wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Daniel Franke []
>> Sent: Monday, August 12, 2013 7:33 PM
>> Everything below is fine by me, but how about <stdbool.h>?
> I would avoid it. At least on its own it seems like a pretty trivial thing for which to drag in a whole C99 dependency.
> But that's my personal bias from my (MSVC-heavy) experience.

I would agree that <stdbool.h> should be avoid and I don't have an MSVC 
bias ;-)

In Solaris code I often tend to use boolean_t (in code that is compiled 
with Solaris Studio, GCC and Clang) but this context I don't see any of 
the common/{de-facto}standard boolean types adding much value.

Darren J Moffat

Powered by blists - more mailing lists