Re: [RFC][PATCH] A generic boolean (version 2)

[Jeff Garzik]

Michael Buesch wrote:
> On Friday 21 July 2006 16:23, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> > > The changes are:
> > > * u2 has been corrected to u1 (and also added it as __u1)
> > Do we really need this? Is not 'bool' enough?
>
> I would say we don't even _want_ this.
> A u1 variable will basically never be one bit wide.
> It will be at least 8bit, or let's say 32bit. Maybe
> even 64bit on some archs. It all depends on the compiler
> plus the arch.
>
> We _don't_ want u1, because we don't get what we see.

For this and 1000 other reasons, we don't want u1.

	Jeff



-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/