[Edbrowse-dev] Bool

[Edbrowse-dev] Bool

[Karl Dahlke]

It's sheer dumb luck that tidy5 uses Bool, with a capital B,
and yes and no instead of true and false,
thus there is no collision with edbrowse source.
The lack of an internal bool type is perhaps
the worst omiission of the original C language.

Karl Dahlke

Re: [Edbrowse-dev] Bool

[Chris Brannon]

Karl Dahlke <eklhad@comcast.net> writes:

> The lack of an internal bool type is perhaps
> the worst omiission of the original C language.

C99 has one.  Quoting from Wikipedia [1]:

Begin quote:
Both C99 and C++ have a {boolean type} bool with constants true and false,
but they behave differently. In C++,
bool is a {built-in type} and a {reserved keyword}.
In C99, a new keyword, _Bool, is introduced as the new boolean type.
In many aspects, it behaves much like an unsigned int,
but conversions from other integer types or pointers always constrained to 0 and 1.
Other than for other unsigned types,
and as one would expect for a boolean type,
such a conversion is 0 if and only if the expression in question evaluates to 0
and it is 1 in all other cases. The header stdbool.h provides macros bool,
true and false that are defined as _Bool, 1 and 0, respectively.
End quote.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compatibility_of_C_and_C%2B%2B

Yea, and the standards didst proliferate,
sowing great confusion amongst the developers that dwelt upon the earth
in those days.

-- Chris

Re: [Edbrowse-dev] Bool

[Kevin Carhart]

> Yea, and the standards didst proliferate,
> sowing great confusion amongst the developers that dwelt upon the earth
> in those days.

Heh heh!