Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucsfcgl.ucsfcgl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!ucsfcgl!arnold
From: arnold@ucsfcgl.UUCP (Ken Arnold%CGL)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: What should be added to C (booleans)
Message-ID: <9874@ucsfcgl.ucsfcgl.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 4-Jun-86 23:19:44 EDT
Article-I.D.: ucsfcgl.9874
Posted: Wed Jun  4 23:19:44 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 7-Jun-86 05:36:27 EDT
References: <590@brl-smoke.ARPA> <3570@nsc.UUCP> <1462@mmintl.UUCP>
Reply-To: arnold@ucsfcgl.UUCP (Ken Arnold%CGL)
Organization: Computer Graphics Laboratory, UCSF
Lines: 23

In article <2176@mit-eddie.MIT.EDU> Barry Margolin writes:
>I think your worries are unfounded.  The difference between (1 == 1) and
>1 is that the former indicates to human readers of the code that the
>expression is being used for its truth value.  In the statement
>	var = 1;
>the reader is likely to assume that var is going to be used
>arithmetically.

Actually, the *real* difference between "(1 == 1)" and "1" is that the
former causes lint to complain that a constant is being used in a
conditional context *every time you use it*.  This is no fun at all.  I
mean, really.

Isn't

	var = TRUE;

just as descriptive?  Why not do that, with

	# define	TRUE	1
	# define	FALSE	0

		Ken Arnold