Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!seismo!rlgvax!cvl!umcp-cs!chris
From: chris@umcp-cs.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.unix
Subject: Re: typedefs, etc. - (nf)
Message-ID: <4626@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 5-Jan-84 02:04:01 EST
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.4626
Posted: Thu Jan  5 02:04:01 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 14-Jan-84 23:48:19 EST
References: <1200@ucbcad.UUCP> <430@bbncca.ARPA>
Organization: Univ. of Maryland, Computer Science Dept.
Lines: 27

Re:
	From: keesan@bbncca.UUCP

	[ Re: ...  typedef enum { FALSE, TRUE } bool; ... ]

	I question the utility of a 'bool' type which generates
	type-clashes with boolean expressions.  However, if you
	insist on using it, do you object to 

		return( (bool)(getchar() == 'y') );

	?  This avoids the type-clash warning, and is guaranteed
	to work.

Unfortunately it's not *guaranteed* to work, unless you use

	typedef enum { FALSE = 0, TRUE = 1 } bool;

to ensure that (bool) 0 == FALSE and (bool) 1 == TRUE.  Otherwise
the result of a boolean expression may be neither FALSE nor TRUE!

Personally I just use integers as boolean-variables.  (As if anyone
cares.)
-- 
In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci
UUCP:	{seismo,allegra,brl-bmd}!umcp-cs!chris
CSNet:	chris@umcp-cs		ARPA:	chris.umcp-cs@CSNet-Relay