Peter Kümmel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| When we use a C compiler then it uses the C-style cast (bool),
| so I think the correctest way is to use static_cast<bool>,
| but this is so ugly that I would prefer (bool).
C-style casts are just too powerful... don't use them.
| I'm not sure if the bool constructor -bool::bool(int)-
| is really as fast as the casts.
I am. If you are not, please provide measurements.
| But sometime it would simple help to "code what you mean" :)
|
| Here an example:
|
| enum type{...}
| bool match(type a, type b) { return (a & b); }
|
| Does this not mean a==b? So why not write it down?
| So we will get a boolean without any casts.
That depends.... it could very well mean ((a & b) == b)
(and also if (a & b) is not b, then (a & b) is 0, so the explict
comparison should not be needed.)
If a is a bit-field the (a & b) is a pretty usual construct.
(bit-field in the 1,2,4,8,16 sense)
--
Lgb
