Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99?
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 10:47:36 -0700
Organization: None to speak of
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <lnd1k320uf.fsf@kst-u.example.com>
References: <6b5aa241-0498-4e41-993b-a1ed445effb0@googlegroups.com> <kfnd1k7jton.fsf@x-alumni2.alumni.caltech.edu> <lntwdj5lv2.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <kfnmvjaiwbw.fsf@x-alumni2.alumni.caltech.edu> <lnlgyu5qin.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <35259377-cc66-489b-aa74-fb031c20ce29@googlegroups.com> <2a43ea82-8927-435f-9897-096948ddbc15@googlegroups.com> <e3ul6kF1l4bU2@mid.individual.net> <nrdu54$2ii$1@dont-email.me> <2348118c-fe7e-4f48-afb5-b453a87c1650@googlegroups.com> <nrf8pi$q3k$2@dont-email.me> <b6a69084-d7b8-4d23-a213-8dcaff8ae7dd@googlegroups.com> <nrg04i$5m1$1@dont-email.me> <87k2eckvu2.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <30349ef9-c5ba-44de-9a98-da50e16ae517@googlegroups.com> <878tuskqde.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <nrgn7m$ga7$1@news.albasani.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="945944de09706c9b4e29b53c9d2efdc2"; logging-data="21318"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/rbmrB+dXHDneBlCgpM2KW"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:z8A3UgxujhNq5g5uI0EqUnfm/Ek= sha1:OL40RUuprLqTBw3jqGN6vkiQE9A=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:93630

Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> writes:
> On 2016-09-16, Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
>> Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> I found some explanation about bool in C++.
>>> The book, "The design and evolution of C++", pag 254-255.
>>>
>>> "Naturally, the first idea was to define an enum. However, and
>>> examination of hundreds of thousand of lines ..reveled that most
>>> boolean types were used in ways that require free conversion from and
>>> to int"
>>
>> Thanks for that, but it can't be the main reason C chose not to use an
>> enum since, as I am sure you know, C has always permitted those
>> conversions, whist C++ decided to forbid them (without a cast -- that's
>> the "free conversion" part).
>
> Hm, I am pretty sure that one can convert bool from/to int without cast in
> C++...

Of course -- because C++'s bool is not an enum.  That's exactly *why*
C++'s bool is not an enum.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"