8 Jan
2013
8 Jan
'13
7:34 p.m.
* Wolfgang Denk wd@denx.de [2013-01-08 18:49]:
In message 6AE080B68D46FC4BA2D2769E68D765B70820541F@039-SN2MPN1-023.039d.mgd.msft.net you wrote:
This seems broken to me. Can we rather try8 and get rid of all this "bool" stuff instead? It's just obfuscating the code...
Like Scott said, we sometimes copy code from Linux that uses 'bool', so it's simpler if we just retain this commonly-used type. If it's part of the language, how is it obfuscating? Maybe the Linux
_Bool has been introduced very late to any C standard, and you can still see this from the ugly, unnatural name.
But C99 (well, that's 12 years now!) also includes <stdbool.h> that defines 'bool', 'true' and 'false'.
Regards, Bernhard