Re: [patch 1/1] consolidate TRUE and FALSE

Randy.Dunlap
2006-03-16T18:56:58Z

On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 18:49:46 +0000 Al Viro wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 10:12:20AM -0800, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
> > On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 18:00:47 +0000 Al Viro wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 06:41:12PM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> > > > I assume that when you are not used to see 'bool', 'true' and 'false'
> > > > then they hurt the eye, but when used to it it looks natural.
> > >
> > > Five words: kernel is written in C.
> > >
> > > Not in Pascal. Not in C++. Not in Algol. "When used to (something
> > > non-idiomatic in C) it becomes natural" is not a valid argument.
> >
> > C (C99) now includes booleans. Are we stuck pre-C99?
>
> TRUE and FALSE are not those. Your point is...?

Correct. So it would be better if they were spelled 'true' and 'false',
as in the C99 spec?

---
~Randy