Time to standardize "true" and "false"
Jesse Furqueron
wjf at attctc.Dallas.TX.US
Mon Sep 25 08:21:20 AEST 1989
In article <13730 at well.UUCP>, nagle at well.UUCP (John Nagle) writes:
>
> I would like to suggest that the time has come to standardize the
> Boolean values in C. Most programs have definitions of these, but they
> differ and clash. As the typing rules become ever tighter, and the number
xyzzy!! and text disappears...
>
> I would suggest that the standardized definition be
> If it's too late to fix this in C, it should be fixed in C++, where
> typing is taken more seriously.
>
> John Nagle
I would suggest rather than FALSE = 0 and TRUE = 1, that the "real" definition
of TRUE is not FALSE (TRUE = not 0), i.e. TRUE = !0. Therefore the following
#define FALSE 0
#define TRUE !0
or for c++ folks
const boolean (FALSE=0, TRUE=!0);
I believe (if this tired and aged memory serves me correctly) that somewhere
K&R refers to this being the evalutations used in if and while statements.
Jesse Furqueron
VISystems
11910 Greeneville Suite 300
LB 29
Dallas, Tx. 75243
(214) 907-8080
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As always, the opinions expressed by myself are not necessarily those of my
employer... maybe one of these days they'll learn to listen!!!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
More information about the Comp.lang.c
mailing list