Re: pll: who uses _Bool
- From: "Charlie Gordon" <news@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 07:41:46 +0100
"CBFalconer" <cbfalconer@xxxxxxxxx> a écrit dans le message de news:
47266B57.200F8F1D@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Keith Thompson wrote:
... snip ...
The question was:
Now, what is the type of true and false, when using:
$ cat /usr/lib/gcc/i486-linux-gnu/4.1.2/include/stdbool.h
[...]
#define true 1
#define false 0
I fail to see how the hypothetical usage of the # operator is
relevant to the question. The types of true, false, and INT_MAX
are all the same: int.
My point is that we don't have a typed identifier at all. We have
created another representation for the digit 1 (or for 0). Yes,
the unadorned use of such digits can generate an int type constant,
however we are not limited to such unadorned use.
The characters 'true' are simply another glyph for the digit '1'.
Not for the digit 1, for the one-digit token ``1''
Anyway, your point is ridiculous: any identifier can be transmogrified into
something else with macro based token pasting.
int x;
long x1;
Q: what is the type of x?
A: int of course.
CBF: not if I do this: GLUE(x,1) with an appropriate definition of GLUE.
--
Chqrlie.
.
- References:
- pll: who uses _Bool
- From: Szabolcs Nagy
- Re: pll: who uses _Bool
- From: Tor Rustad
- Re: pll: who uses _Bool
- From: CBFalconer
- Re: pll: who uses _Bool
- From: Tor Rustad
- Re: pll: who uses _Bool
- From: CBFalconer
- Re: pll: who uses _Bool
- From: Tor Rustad
- Re: pll: who uses _Bool
- From: CBFalconer
- Re: pll: who uses _Bool
- From: Keith Thompson
- Re: pll: who uses _Bool
- From: CBFalconer
- Re: pll: who uses _Bool
- From: Keith Thompson
- Re: pll: who uses _Bool
- From: CBFalconer
- pll: who uses _Bool
- Prev by Date: Re: file related
- Next by Date: Re: The most important things to write a program
- Previous by thread: Re: pll: who uses _Bool
- Next by thread: Re: pll: who uses _Bool
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|