On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 4:59 PM, Brian Paul <bri...@vmware.com> wrote: > On 06/08/2011 08:54 AM, Jose Fonseca wrote: >> >> Personally, I prefer the standard C bool type, given it's a) standard, b) >> shorter. Furthermore Microsoft's windows.h already defines boolean: >> >> $ grep -r '\<boolean\>' /usr/i586-mingw32msvc/include/ >> /usr/i586-mingw32msvc/include/rpcndr.h:typedef unsigned char boolean; >> >> which can create havoc depending on how the windows.h is included. >> >> I understand the gallium's naming conventing of taking the GL types such >> as GLboolean and GLuint and stripping the GL prefix, but there are already >> too many bool type definitions out there -- often incompatible ones >> (sometimes int). >> >> So, I really see no point for boolean type other than consistency for sake >> of it, and if we're really cleaning up the sources, I'd much rather do it on >> opposite direction, i.e., s/\<boolean\>/bool/g. >> >> Anyway, this is probably something we might not achieve consensus, so no >> biggie if we stick boolean as far as I'm concerned. > > I'm happy with either one too. I just noticed mixed use in a few files and > thought I'd make things consistent.
I could go either way as well, but the one thing that pushes me to prefer bool over boolean is because it gets highlighted in vim by default. Cheers Jakob. _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
