On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 at 02:38:23AM +0200, ricknu-0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > Er... Of _course_ booleans are values. And yes, you can say true + false. > > Guaranteed to evaluate to int, value of expression being 1. It's perfectly > > correct C99. Same as true + true is guaranteed to be 2 (int, again); > > assigning > > that to _Bool variable is guaranteed to give 1, aka true (see the rules > > for conversion to _Bool). > Can you really say it really is a value? With C definition: ex an positiv > integer value => 'true' => value not zero, if converted from integer to boolean > and back. A value would return a specific value on the secound step, right? Yes. RTFStandard, please. > > Now, sparse handling of _Bool sucks in quite a few places (e.g. conversion > > to it is not reduction modulo 2, it's comparison with 0), but I wonder if > > that's what you have in mind... > My main goal is to make it able to find possible places where an integer is used > as an boolean. I'm afraid that you are confused; what exactly do you mean by "boolean"? Note that type of 1 == 1 is *not* _Bool; it's defined as int. You can convert it to _Bool, but that's it. Please, read through the relevant sections of standard, starting with 6.3.1.2 and 6.3.1.1[2]. See also 6.5.3.4[5], 6.5.8, 6.5.9, 6.5.13 and 6.5.14 for operations resulting in int 0 or 1. See 7.16 for stdbool stuff. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
