On 07/02/2012 09:26 AM, R?mi Denis-Courmont wrote: > On Mon, 02 Jul 2012 08:45:42 +0200, David Henningsson > <david.henningsson at canonical.com> wrote: >> It might make sense to keep something like >> >> #ifndef HAVE_STD_BOOL >> typedef int bool; > > I sincerely don't recommend that kind of hacks. > > int and bool are completely different things. The representation in memory > may be different depending on the ABI. Furthermore, the conversion rule for > the compiler are not the same. That can introduce subtle bugs on old > compilers. I think it's best to fail explicitly than to hide bugs. bool / pa_bool_t is not used in the public API/ABI, there we use only ints (for the reasons you claim above, I believe). Does your point still stand even if it is only used internally? -- David Henningsson, Canonical Ltd. https://launchpad.net/~diwic
