Hi! > > I like it for the annotation we get. > > > > int fluff; > > if(fluff == 0) > > > > This does not tell if fluff is an integer or a boolean (that is, what the > > programmer intended to do -- not the 'int' the compiler sees). > > If it had been if(!fluff), it would give a hint, but a lot of places also have > > !x where x really is intended to be an integer (and should have been x==0 or > > y==NULL resp.) > > > > Bool would not help much either unless declaration is immediately follows > use. I like Alan Sterns proposal ofencode return value in function name > better - actions should always return < 0/0 and predicates should always > be boolean equivalent. Sounds very reasonable. Even today, 90% of code follows that convention. Perhaps adding it to codingstyle would help? -- Thanks for all the (sleeping) penguins. -- VGER BF report: H 0.254977 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
