This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCC Steering Committee decision on ISO C conversion
- From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- To: Richard dot Earnshaw at arm dot com
- Cc: "Kaveh R. Ghazi" <ghazi at caip dot rutgers dot edu>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, rsandifo at redhat dot com
- Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 17:12:39 +0200
- Subject: Re: GCC Steering Committee decision on ISO C conversion
- References: <200206141428.KAA02101@caip.rutgers.edu> <200206141459.PAA17384@cam-mail2.cambridge.arm.com>
- Reply-to: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 03:59:14PM +0100, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> > ... But there's a lot more we can do for ISO C90
> > conversion.
>
> > E.g. as you suggested above, you can convert to the new function
> > definitions and use bool parameters.
>
> IIRC bool wasn't added until C95; I certainly can't find any mention of it
> in c90.
That's not relevant here, since if stdbool.h is not provided and ISO C99
compiler is not used, bool will be define:
typedef char _Bool;
# define bool _Bool
so it is all about whether we can use char parameters.
Jakub