X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
Message-ID:	<3FFE97BE.4CA94BA3@yahoo.com>
Date:	Fri, 09 Jan 2004 06:59:58 -0500
From:	CBFalconer <cbfalconer AT yahoo DOT com>
Organization:	Ched Research
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language:	en
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: stdbool.h and complex.h
References:	<Pine DOT OSF DOT 4 DOT 58 DOT 0401071356580 DOT 26260 AT sirppi DOT helsinki DOT fi> <3FFCF1F4 DOT B86AC9DA AT yahoo DOT com> <Pine DOT OSF DOT 4 DOT 58 DOT 0401081156010 DOT 23737 AT sirppi DOT helsinki DOT fi> <3FFDEB2F DOT F9560613 AT yahoo DOT com> <9003-Fri09Jan2004105245+0200-eliz AT elta DOT co DOT il>
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > From: CBFalconer <cbfalconer AT yahoo DOT com>
> >
> > On reconsideration I think you and Eli are right.  However I would
> > separate out the strict part.  The thing being guarded against is
> > the use of _Bool below C99, because it doesn't exist.
> 
> Sorry, I don't think I understand what you are asking for.  Could you
> elaborate, or, better yet, show us the modified stdbool.h that you
> would like to see?
> 
> If you are afraid of _Bool being injected into the namespace, then
> this is not a problem, since ANSI C says symbols which begin with an
> underscore and an upper-case letter are reserved for the
> implementation, and so cannot possibly conflict with user's symbols.

Injecting _Bool is no problem, using it (under C90) is.  So the
only problem that can arise is not having the underlying C99
abilities.  Therefore the proposed stdbool.h is fine, with the
solitary exception of the "|| STRICT_ANSI" term.

-- 
Chuck F (cbfalconer AT yahoo DOT com) (cbfalconer AT worldnet DOT att DOT net)
   Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
   <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>  USE worldnet address!

- Raw text -