Re: [RFC][PATCH] A generic boolean (version 4)

[Jeff Garzik]

Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> > > > +#define false false
> > > > +#define true true 
> > > Can someone please tell me what advantage 'define true true' is going to
> > > bring, besides than being able to '#ifdef true'?
> > It
> >
> > (a) makes type information available to the C compiler, where a plain #define
> > does not.
>
> Do you mean preprocessor? C already knows about true from the enum.

I was describing the overall purpose of the enum + #define change, when 
you take my "(a)" and "(b)" in sum.


> > (b) handles all '#ifndef true' statements properly
>
> Holy *, is there _really_ code in linux/ that depends on true being 
> [not] defined?

I suggest re-reading the boolean patches in this thread, to answer that 
question...

Programmer wanting to use boolean inevitably add an '#ifndef true' or 
'#ifndef TRUE' style statement to their code.

	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/