Re: Conversion to generic boolean

Andrew Morton
2006-08-29T00:18:14Z

On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 10:32:02 +0100
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote:

> On Sat, Aug 26, 2006 at 05:24:42AM +0200, Richard Knutsson wrote:
> > Hello
> >
> > Just would like to ask if you want patches for:
>
> Total NACK to any of this boolean ididocy. I very much hope you didn't
> get the impression you actually have a chance to get this merged.

I was kinda planning on merging it ;)

I can't say that I'm in love with the patches, but they do improve the
situation.

At present we have >50 different definitions of TRUE and gawd knows how
many private implementations of various flavours of bool.

In that context, Richard's approach of giving the kernel a single
implementation of bool/true/false and then converting things over to use it
makes sense. The other approach would be to go through and nuke the lot,
convert them to open-coded 0/1.

I'm not particularly fussed either way, really. But the present situation
is nuts.