On Sun, 04 Jan 2015 18:43:22 -0500, John de la Garza said: > On Sat, Jan 03, 2015 at 11:20:29PM -0500, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: > > On Sat, 03 Jan 2015 18:54:00 -0500, John de la Garza said: > > > > > It should not be assumed that true will always be 1 as defined in > > > include/linux/stddef.h, right? > > > > No, I mean use an actual 'bool' type rather than 'int'. Consider this from > > kernel/softirq.c: > > yes, bool has two possible values true and false > > from include/linux/stddef.h: > enum { > false = 0, > true = 1 > };
Note that's an *anonynous* enum, which defines the two values, but it *doesn't* define an enum type that can be used to force type safety. No, if you're converting a variable from int to bool, the *important* line is from include/linux/types.h: typedef _Bool bool; which ensures more type safety than the enum does.
pgprXoxCM02Dc.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies