Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #8115
| From | "JBarleycorn" <jbnh2o@newsnet.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c++ |
| Subject | Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? |
| Date | 2011-07-22 17:22 -0500 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <j0ct81$b4c$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (6 earlier) <98pi8pFroiU1@mid.individual.net> <j089to$j9f$1@dont-email.me> <8e84b804-86f8-40e9-896f-27599e108ac1@e18g2000vbx.googlegroups.com> <j0ae4o$oce$1@dont-email.me> <acac70e2-b8df-4f02-ac0a-6fd5d20290ad@b19g2000yqj.googlegroups.com> |
"James Kanze" <james.kanze@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:acac70e2-b8df-4f02-ac0a-6fd5d20290ad@b19g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 22, 12:52 am, "JBarleycorn" <jbn...@newsnet.org> wrote:
>> James Kanze wrote:
>
> [...]
>> > Their use is fairly limited, and I can't
>> > think of a case where I'd use them in a struct. (They are
>> > convenient for certain operations, however, when their
>> > restricted portability isn't an issue.)
>
>> You view of the concept seems to be exactly the opposite of mine. Your
>> view seems more appropriate, to me, for a 4GL rather than for C/C++.
>
> My view is based on Kernighan and Richie. It was current thirty
> years ago, and dominates things like Unix kernel code (which is
> hardly written in the spirit of a 4GL).
>
>> >> bool is unusable in structs in many instances then.
>
>> > You keep saying this, but it flies in the face of actual facts.
>
>> It depends on how you program. When I say that, I mean for the way I
>> program and use the language.
>
> I'd still be interested in seeing an actual example where the
> size of bool makes a difference. Suppose it was required to be
> 1: XDR requires it to be four bytes, so if you're serializing in
> XDR format, you write:
>
> void
> writeBool( std::ostream& dest, bool value )
> {
> writeInt( dest, value ? 1 : 0 );
> }
>
> or something along those lines. Code which, of course, works
> equally well if the size of bool is something other than 1.
>
>> > People use bool in structs all the time, with no problems.
>
>> If I had to be continually faced with having to think about what the
>> effect of integral type size changes would be in C++, I would not use
>> the
>> language. Though maybe I wouldn't program at all then!
>
> Who thinks of it? Ever. About the only thing one might
> consider is whether the type is large enough: I've seen a lot of
> code which uses long, rather than int, because INT_MAX is only
> guaranteed to be 32767. This even in code that will clearly
> never run on a 16 bit machine. *IF* I felt I had to take this
> into consideration, I'd use things like int_least32_t or
> int_fast32_t. (But if the code clearly will never be used on a
> 16 bit machine, I'll just go with int.)
>
>> >> Serialization is not a panacea, it's tedium.
>
>> > You've mentionned serialization several times, but you've yet to
>> > explain how the fact that the size of bool being implementation
>> > defined affects it in any way. The internal representation
>> > doesn't generally affect serialization. And it varies, not just
>> > for bool, but for int.
>
>> int and bool are in the same boat in that respect. The *only* time I
>> use
>> int, or its unsigned counterpart, is when I consciously *want* a type
>> to
>> expand across 32-bit and 64-bit platforms, and yes, I test in a header
>> if
>> my assumptions are valid on a given platform. I view fixed-width
>> integral
>> types, even if I have to synthesize them as I did before there was
>> stdint.h, as the "normal" ones and the "expanding" types as the
>> special
>> ones. Try it sometime and you'll probably never go back to the other
>> way
>> of thinking.
>
> Why? It sounds like a major step backwards to me, and it
> certainly isn't how the language was designed to be used.
>
I'm not knocking it. If you and others want to use 30 year old paradigms,
go for it. Just don't expect me to adopt and be enslaved by such
limitations.
Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Size of bool unspecified: why? "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> - 2011-07-16 05:33 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-16 10:02 -0700
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? James Kanze <james.kanze@gmail.com> - 2011-07-20 13:05 -0700
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "JBarleycorn" <jbnh2o@newsnet.org> - 2011-07-20 15:46 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-21 09:01 +1200
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "JBarleycorn" <jbnh2o@newsnet.org> - 2011-07-20 19:32 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-21 14:46 +1200
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "JBarleycorn" <jbnh2o@newsnet.org> - 2011-07-20 23:28 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-21 16:43 +1200
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "JBarleycorn" <jbnh2o@newsnet.org> - 2011-07-21 02:56 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-21 20:19 +1200
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "JBarleycorn" <jbnh2o@newsnet.org> - 2011-07-21 18:29 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-22 11:40 +1200
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "JBarleycorn" <jbnh2o@newsnet.org> - 2011-07-21 22:33 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-22 15:46 +1200
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "JBarleycorn" <jbnh2o@newsnet.org> - 2011-07-21 23:07 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-22 16:12 +1200
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-31 18:45 +1200
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-22 00:12 -0700
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? James Kanze <james.kanze@gmail.com> - 2011-07-22 11:10 -0700
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "JBarleycorn" <jbnh2o@newsnet.org> - 2011-07-22 16:52 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-23 09:55 +1200
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? James Kanze <james.kanze@gmail.com> - 2011-07-22 11:01 -0700
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "JBarleycorn" <jbnh2o@newsnet.org> - 2011-07-22 17:17 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-23 10:46 +1200
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? James Kanze <james.kanze@gmail.com> - 2011-07-24 03:48 -0700
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-24 12:40 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? James Kanze <james.kanze@gmail.com> - 2011-07-30 11:22 -0700
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach:usenet@gmail.com> - 2011-07-31 02:33 +0200
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? James Kanze <james.kanze@gmail.com> - 2011-07-30 11:34 -0700
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach:usenet@gmail.com> - 2011-07-25 04:46 +0200
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? James Kanze <james.kanze@gmail.com> - 2011-07-21 07:23 -0700
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "JBarleycorn" <jbnh2o@newsnet.org> - 2011-07-21 18:52 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? James Kanze <james.kanze@gmail.com> - 2011-07-22 11:24 -0700
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "JBarleycorn" <jbnh2o@newsnet.org> - 2011-07-22 17:22 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-23 10:51 +1200
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-22 00:17 -0700
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-22 04:26 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? James Kanze <james.kanze@gmail.com> - 2011-07-21 02:09 -0700
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "JBarleycorn" <jbnh2o@newsnet.org> - 2011-07-21 19:11 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? James Kanze <james.kanze@gmail.com> - 2011-07-22 11:58 -0700
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "JBarleycorn" <jbnh2o@newsnet.org> - 2011-07-22 17:48 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-21 08:41 -0700
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "JBarleycorn" <jbnh2o@newsnet.org> - 2011-07-21 19:14 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? James Kanze <james.kanze@gmail.com> - 2011-07-22 12:01 -0700
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "JBarleycorn" <jbnh2o@newsnet.org> - 2011-07-22 17:51 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? Noah Roberts <dont@email.me> - 2011-07-20 16:57 -0700
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? James Kanze <james.kanze@gmail.com> - 2011-07-21 07:29 -0700
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "JBarleycorn" <jbnh2o@newsnet.org> - 2011-07-21 19:24 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-22 12:33 +1200
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "JBarleycorn" <jbnh2o@newsnet.org> - 2011-07-21 22:42 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? James Kanze <james.kanze@gmail.com> - 2011-07-21 01:59 -0700
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "JBarleycorn" <jbnh2o@newsnet.org> - 2011-07-21 19:42 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? James Kanze <james.kanze@gmail.com> - 2011-07-22 12:20 -0700
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "JBarleycorn" <jbnh2o@newsnet.org> - 2011-07-22 18:21 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-16 22:23 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> - 2011-07-17 00:07 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-17 17:15 +1200
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> - 2011-07-17 00:24 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-17 02:02 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> - 2011-07-17 03:02 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-17 03:23 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> - 2011-07-17 05:36 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "James" <no@spam.invalid> - 2011-07-17 16:24 -0700
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> - 2011-07-18 06:49 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "James" <no@spam.invalid> - 2011-07-18 16:46 -0700
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-19 11:59 +1200
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> - 2011-07-19 22:18 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> - 2011-07-17 03:04 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-22 00:32 -0700
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-22 00:41 -0700
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2011-07-17 13:50 +0000
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> - 2011-07-18 06:50 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? James Kanze <james.kanze@gmail.com> - 2011-07-20 13:06 -0700
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? Pawel Dziepak <pdziepak@quarnos.org> - 2011-07-21 12:59 +0000
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? James Kanze <james.kanze@gmail.com> - 2011-07-21 07:11 -0700
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? "JBarleycorn" <jbnh2o@newsnet.org> - 2011-07-21 19:21 -0500
Re: Size of bool unspecified: why? James Kanze <james.kanze@gmail.com> - 2011-07-22 12:28 -0700
csiph-web