2007/5/1, Jon Snader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 08:22:56PM -0400, erik quanstrom wrote:
>
> it's more in the spirit of oberon, or pascal which have
> had more formally defined and machine independent
> types.
>
Indeed. This (_Bool) does seem to be a solution in search of a
problem. Is there anyone (other than a few refugees from Pascal)
who believes that C suffers from its lack of a formal boolean
type?
I've seen more than my fair share of tf = !!value; out there, which is
just awful to read. It is very useful to have a defined way of
determining the binary success or failure of an operation without
having to understand whether -1, 1, 0, 38, or -129125 is success,
failure, or indication of an error condition.
jcs
--dho
