TRUE and FALSE
Olumide O. Emuleomo
olu at sysauto.UUCP
Thu Sep 6 07:39:35 AEST 1990
In article <2341 at cirrusl.UUCP>, dhesi%cirrusl at oliveb.ATC.olivetti.com (Rahul Dhesi) writes:
> I was brash enough to suggest
>
> But in fact my suggested definitions are much more useful than the
> common recommendation of defining TRUE and FALSE.
>
> No matter how careful the original programmer is, sooner or later
> somebody will come along and, noticing that TRUE means true, will try
> to do something like:
>
> i = isdigit(c);
> ...
> if (i == TRUE) ...
>
> Of course, defining ONE and ZERO is fairly silly. But defining TRUE
> and FALSE is quite risky. I'll take fairly silly over quite risky any
> day.
> --
> Rahul Dhesi <dhesi%cirrusl at oliveb.ATC.olivetti.com>
> UUCP: oliveb!cirrusl!dhesi
TRUE and FALSE were never meant to be tested explicitly.
Good programming practise demands that they be used somewhat as follows
if( keyword_found(fname) )
{
etc...
etc... etc..
}
keyword_found(char *fname_param)
{
switch(foo)
{
case FAILURE:
etc...
return(FALSE);
case SQLNOTFOUND:
more etc..
return(FALSE);
etc...
}
return(TRUE);
}
Cheers
--olu at sysauto.UUCP
More information about the Comp.lang.c
mailing list