This is the mail archive of the gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Strange CPP failures

From: Neil Booth <neil at daikokuya dot co dot uk>
To: "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk>
Cc: Jason R Thorpe <thorpej at wasabisystems dot com>, gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org,Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 22:28:26 +0100
Subject: Re: Strange CPP failures
References: <20020716211124.GA5316@daikokuya.co.uk> <Pine.LNX.4.33.0207162222340.31185-100000@kern.srcf.societies.cam.ac.uk>

Joseph S. Myers wrote:-

> The work to use bool in GCC is Zack's, but I'd suppose the portability
> requirement on assignments to bool needs documenting in
> README.Portability.  I'd considered it obvious (no-one's suggested 
> allowing use of C99 features in GCC yet) that uses of bool in GCC need to 
> allow for it being either a "traditional" bool type (as in curses etc.) or 
> a C99 _Bool.

It's obvious now; it wasn't to me before!

OK.  I've been one of the heaviest users of bool.  I'll skip
through auditing the uses for such gotchas.

Neil.

References:
- Re: Strange CPP failures
  - From: Neil Booth
- Re: Strange CPP failures
  - From: Joseph S. Myers

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]