Re: RFC: booleans and the kernel

Erik Andersen
2002-01-25T02:01:15Z

On Thu Jan 24, 2002 at 12:42:58PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> A small issue...
>
> C99 introduced _Bool as a builtin type. The gcc patch for it went into
> cvs around Dec 2000. Any objections to propagating this type and usage
> of 'true' and 'false' around the kernel?
>
> Where variables are truly boolean use of a bool type makes the
> intentions of the code more clear. And it also gives the compiler a
> slightly better chance to optimize code [I suspect].
>
> Actually I prefer 'bool' to '_Bool', if this becomes a kernel standard.

Agreed, bool is nicer. Out of curiosity, esp
wrt struct packing, how does gcc actully store
a bool? A single bit? A full 32-bit word?

-Erik

--
Erik B. Andersen http://codepoet-consulting.com/
--This message was written using 73% post-consumer electrons--