On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 12:54 AM, Jose Fonseca <jfons...@vmware.com> 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.
Yeah I like this idea, the kernel uses bool, and its painful to transition from one to the other sometimes I forget. The other question is true/false vs TRUE/FALSE, not sure what the standard is. Dave. _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
