On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 08:53:45AM +0200, Luc Van Oostenryck wrote: > Both are equally correct so it looks to me as an unneeded change > but I don't really mind. However, I had to adapt the corresponding > test like this: > > -sizeof-bool.c:3:16: warning: expression using sizeof bool > +sizeof-bool.c:3:16: warning: expression using sizeof(bool) Hm, giving it a second look over I think for consistencies sake maybe we should just use "warning: expression using sizeof _Bool"? Since "bool" it's always a typedef, maybe it's best to just stick to the type specified in the standard. > I don't find 'the sizeof(_Bool)' very grammatical. What about a simple: > "the size of a _Bool" (or "the size of the _Bool type")? But yeah, I do agree it's probably best to nix the parentheses. > I don't think it's possible to change the size of _Bool, so I would remove the > "By default" here above and just leave "GCC assigns ..." or more simply > "GCC uses a size of 1 for the type _Bool"? Well yes and no. Though it's sort of obscure, the GCC manual does have a -mone-byte-bool flag, the description of which is: > > -mone-byte-bool > > > > Override the defaults for "bool" so that "sizeof(bool)==1". By default > > "sizeof(bool)" is 4 when compiling for Darwin/PowerPC and 1 when > > compiling for Darwin/x86, so this option has no effect on x86. So I figured since there is _some_ remote possibly of it not being 1 it's marginalty better to word it this way. Taking note of your suggestions I'm making a V2 now. -- Cheers, Joey Pabalinas
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
