From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [patch 16/30] drivers/scsi/aic7xxx_old: Convert to generic boolean-values Date: Tue, 08 May 2007 14:44:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20070508.144445.88474913.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20070508121411.d187a648.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1178652273.3737.67.camel@mulgrave.il.steeleye.com> <20070508131152.0003b770.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:58702 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S967821AbXEHVop (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 May 2007 17:44:45 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20070508131152.0003b770.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: akpm@linux-foundation.org Cc: James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, ricknu-0@student.ltu.se From: Andrew Morton Date: Tue, 8 May 2007 13:11:52 -0700 > On Tue, 08 May 2007 14:24:32 -0500 > James Bottomley wrote: > > > However, could we compromise and just add TRUE = true, FALSE = false to > > the enum? > > That sounds sane. But I don't recall all the details of the discussion > and perhaps I'm missing something. > > I think the whole bool/true/false thing is pretty dissatisfactory really. > Java gets this right and C cannot and will not and we end up with people > using true and false as plain old "1" and "0". I think it's more important to be consistent across the entire tree, whatever we choose, than to be "nice" and add compat define hacks for the sake of a select few stubborn drivers. If you're going to add those ugly "#define TRUE true" bits, the whole point of the change is lost so you might as not make it at all.