From:	rpolzer AT www42 DOT t-offline DOT de (echo 'Rudolf Polzer'>/dev/null)
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: bool type
References:	<20010418005914 DOT 7485 DOT qmail AT web13308 DOT mail DOT yahoo DOT com> <3add4e25 DOT 65909932 AT news DOT dingoblue DOT net DOT au> <f5nsdt4uc2jotdqq5hsfmqdarkfqqj2juf AT 4ax DOT com>
X-newsgroup:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
X-realname:	Jack Klein
X-Ringtones:	http://ringtones AT durchnull DOT de
X-Original:	no
Message-ID:	<slrn9dtk7r.9of.rpolzer@www42.t-offline.de>
User-Agent:	slrn/0.9.6.3 (Linux)
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 13:50:19 +0200
Lines:	21
NNTP-Posting-Host:	213.7.26.225
X-Trace:	987681360 news.freenet.de 6543 213.7.26.225
X-Complaints-To:	abuse AT freenet DOT de
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Jack Klein <jackklein AT spamcop DOT net> wrote:
> The 1999 update to the C standard added a new type called _Bool (the
> combination of leading underscore and upper case letter puts it in the
> namespace reserved for the implementation) which is similar, but not
> identical to, the C++ type bool.
> 
> If you include the C99 standard header <stdbool.h>, it defines the
> four macros bool, true, false, and __bool_true_false_are_defined.
> 
> If your gcc version supports _Bool, you can use this type without
> including any header.  If it supports _Bool and comes with the header
> <stdbool.h> (or you can make your own <stdbool.h>, it's a pretty
> simple header), then you can use the C99 macro bool.

Isn't this a valid stdbool.h (without the include guards)

typedef bool int;
#define true 1
#define false 0

or is a boolean more than that?

- Raw text -