Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool |
| Date | 2012-04-26 22:32 -0400 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <jnd0fk$8vk$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (2 earlier) <jksrbo$p2a$1@dont-email.me> <jnbd7q$17a$1@dont-email.me> <jnbhej$ovn$1@dont-email.me> <jncspr$on8$1@dont-email.me> <jncuh1$ls$1@dont-email.me> |
On 4/26/2012 9:58 PM, James Kuyper wrote:
> On 04/26/2012 09:29 PM, Eric Sosman wrote:
> ...
>> "I'll grant that there are other ways to write the logic," as
>> a person I deeply respect once wrote.
>>
>> Here's another example where arithmetic on bool is handy:
>>
>> const int days_in_month[2][12] = {
>> { 31, 28, 31, 30, 31, 30, 31, 31, 30, 31, 30, 31 },
>> { 31, 29, 31, 30, 31, 30, 31, 31, 30, 31, 30, 31 }
>> };
>> bool is_leap_year = ...;
>> int month = ...;
>> int days = days_in_month[is_leap_year][month - 1];
>>
>> "One (int) cast and all's well," but don't forget the skeptical
>> glance one usually casts upon casts...
>
> In a hypothetical C-like language where bools were truly a separate
> type, a cast to int would not be allowed. Instead, use
> (isleap_year ? 1 : 0).
"I'll grant ..." (Is there an echo in here?)
The question that burns in my feeble brain is: "Why?" What is
the benefit that a "No arithmetic on booleans" rule would bring?
In what way would the hypothetical C-like language be superior to
C-where-ints-work-just-fine-thanks? I'm not inclined to accept
unsupported assertions like "Cleanliness is next to Godliness,"
but would attend to concrete, measurable, or estimatable advantages,
or to credible first-person anecdotes.
So far, the only thing I've heard is the O.P.'s complaint
that the compiler allowed him to get himself in trouble by making
code changes without first understanding the code he was changing.
Well, golly.
If you're looking for a language with seat belts, training
wheels, airbags, and padded walls, C shouldn't be your first
choice, and restrictions on arithmetic wouldn't change matters.
--
Eric Sosman
esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool mathog <dmathog@gmail.com> - 2012-03-23 08:40 -0700
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-03-23 12:07 -0400
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-03-23 21:45 +0100
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-23 17:17 -0500
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-03-23 23:29 +0100
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-24 11:48 +1300
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-03-24 23:47 +0100
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2012-03-25 09:05 +0000
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-03-25 11:30 +0100
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-03-25 21:05 +0100
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool Lowell Gilbert <lgusenet@be-well.ilk.org> - 2012-03-25 16:15 -0400
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-03-25 22:14 +0100
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-03-25 23:46 -0400
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-03-26 12:05 +0100
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool Lowell Gilbert <lgusenet@be-well.ilk.org> - 2012-03-26 15:22 -0400
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2012-03-25 11:44 +0100
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-03-25 13:06 +0100
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-03-27 11:12 -0700
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-24 01:15 -0500
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-03-24 23:29 +0100
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool mathog <dmathog@gmail.com> - 2012-03-27 09:53 -0700
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-03-27 11:07 -0700
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-03-27 14:16 -0400
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-04-26 07:57 -0400
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-04-26 14:08 +0200
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-04-26 09:09 -0400
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-04-26 21:29 -0400
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-04-26 21:58 -0400
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-04-26 22:32 -0400
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-04-27 06:31 -0400
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool Lanarcam <lanarcam1@yahoo.fr> - 2012-04-27 19:26 +0200
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-04-27 11:28 -0700
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool Lanarcam <lanarcam1@yahoo.fr> - 2012-04-27 20:51 +0200
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool ImpalerCore <jadill33@gmail.com> - 2012-04-27 12:17 -0700
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-04-28 09:17 +0200
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-04-28 13:26 -0700
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2012-04-27 18:11 +0000
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool ImpalerCore <jadill33@gmail.com> - 2012-04-27 12:05 -0700
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-04-27 15:32 -0400
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2012-04-27 20:16 +0000
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-04-27 16:45 -0400
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-04-27 21:26 +0100
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-04-27 21:18 -0400
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-04-27 21:33 +0100
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-04-27 15:36 -0700
Re: c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool ImpalerCore <jadill33@gmail.com> - 2012-04-27 08:31 -0700
csiph-web