On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 7:11 PM, Michael Schwingen <rincew...@discworld.dascon.de> wrote: > Andreas Fritiofson wrote: >> This would help to avoid picking a magic value for true. >> #define false 0 >> #define true (!false) // this will actually evaluate to 1 >> > IMHO, this is unnecessary obfuscation. > The C standard guarantees that this will evaluate to 1, so why not write > 1 directly? >
To signal to less knowledgeable people, who might be reading/altering the code, that it is *not* an arbitrary value. You are probably less likely to change the definition of "true" from "not false" than from "1" to another non-zero value which might seem just as valid but which isn't, such as "-1". Just my 0.14772 SEK... A bit more on-topic: Doesn't clang have stdbool.h? It should provide these constants already. For systems lacking stdbool.h, OpenOCD already contains the necessary compatibility defines in types.h, isn't that getting included? _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
