Hello Ian, On Sun, 25 Oct 2015 19:22:00 +0000, Ian Campbell <ijc+ub...@hellion.org.uk> wrote: > On Sun, 2015-10-25 at 14:22 +0100, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: > > On Sun, 25 Oct 2015 12:40:45 +0000, Ian Campbell > > > Doesn't the bool return type already cause that to happen? (from the > > > PoV of the caller at least) > > > > When all is said and done, a C bool is a C int, > > Not if it is a _Bool (via stdbool.h or some other way). > > A _Bool is always either 0 or 1, and scalar value which is converted to > a _Bool is converted to either 0 or 1. > > > So no, types, bool or otherwise, do not cause any implicit '!!' to > > happen. > > I believe this is not correct when _Bool is used. > > In u-boot a bool is indeed a _Bool (or at least I don't see any other > typedef's and I can see various includes on stdbool.h, I therefore > didn't feel the need to check how bool is arrived at in this particular > file).
What you write is possibly correct for C++, but certainly not for C, for which booleans are integers, with no compiler-enforced constraint on their value domains. Amicalement, -- Albert.1 _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
