[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [RFA]: BOOL coding standards (Was: Problemwith+numberWithBool:?)
From: |
Pascal J . Bourguignon |
Subject: |
Re: [RFA]: BOOL coding standards (Was: Problemwith+numberWithBool:?) |
Date: |
Mon, 9 Feb 2004 09:08:44 +0100 |
Kazunobu Kuriyama writes:
> Don't attribute it to C programmers. Sane C programmers don't (want to,
> at least) do anything like above. Apart from the insane, they never try
> to devise a boolen type by themselves once they know the language well,
> though they prefer defining convenience macros such as #define FALSE (0)
> and #define TRUE (1) in their header file. C99? They cleverly leave
> that type to the compiler! We should know this makes a huge difference.
>
> Apart from their being actually clever or not, it's responsibility for
> Objective C how to define BOOL. The fault lies only in the fact that BOOL
> has not been made a built-in Objective C type so far (the spec defines it
> as if it were, not explicitly stated like this though). Without having
> compilers exactly know the meaning of boolean, what can we expect them to
> do with it? They are only told BOOL is a kind of short integer! Wrong
> usage of BOOL must attribute to careless ObjC programmers, neither C
> programmers nor compilers. IOW, that's our problem.
Sorry, I can't resist:
@interface BOOL
{
unsigned char _private;
}
+(id)yes;
+(id)no;
-(void)ifYes:(void(*)(void))thenFun;
-(void)ifNo:(void(*)(void))elseFun;
-(void)ifYes:(void(*)(void))thenFun ifNo:(void(*))elseFun;
-(int)isYes;
@end
@interface BOOL(sloppy)
+(id)boolFromCInt:(int)value;
+(id)boolFromCShort:(short)value;
+(id)boolFromCChar:(char)value;
+(id)boolFromCPointer:(void*)value;
@end
(just to make it an Objective-C problem instead of a C problem ;-).
> (I'm not saying BOOL should be a built-in; this is another issue and I don't
> want to discuss it here.)
--
__Pascal_Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he doesn't
want merely because you think it would be good for him.--Robert Heinlein
http://www.theadvocates.org/
- RE: [RFA]: BOOL coding standards (Was: Problemwith+numberWithBool:?), Adam Fedor, 2004/02/05
- Re: [RFA]: BOOL coding standards (Was: Problemwith+numberWithBool:?), Richard Frith-Macdonald, 2004/02/07
- Re: [RFA]: BOOL coding standards (Was: Problemwith+numberWithBool:?), David Ayers, 2004/02/07
- Re: [RFA]: BOOL coding standards (Was: Problemwith+numberWithBool:?), Kazunobu Kuriyama, 2004/02/07
- Re: [RFA]: BOOL coding standards (Was: Problemwith+numberWithBool:?), David Ayers, 2004/02/07
- Re: [RFA]: BOOL coding standards (Was: Problemwith+numberWithBool:?), Pascal J . Bourguignon, 2004/02/07
- Re: [RFA]: BOOL coding standards (Was: Problemwith+numberWithBool:?), Nicola Pero, 2004/02/07
- Re: [RFA]: BOOL coding standards (Was: Problemwith+numberWithBool:?), Kazunobu Kuriyama, 2004/02/09
- Re: [RFA]: BOOL coding standards (Was: Problemwith+numberWithBool:?),
Pascal J . Bourguignon <=
- Re: [RFA]: BOOL coding standards (Was: Problemwith+numberWithBool:?), David Ayers, 2004/02/09
- Re: [RFA]: BOOL coding standards (Was: Problemwith+numberWithBool:?), Richard Frith-Macdonald, 2004/02/09
- Re: [RFA]: BOOL coding standards (Was: Problemwith+numberWithBool:?), Pascal J . Bourguignon, 2004/02/09
- Re: [RFA]: BOOL coding standards (Was: Problemwith+numberWithBool:?), David Ayers, 2004/02/09
- Re: [RFA]: BOOL coding standards (Was: Problemwith+numberWithBool:?), Kazunobu Kuriyama, 2004/02/09
- Re: [RFA]: BOOL coding standards (Was: Problemwith+numberWithBool:?), Pascal J . Bourguignon, 2004/02/09
- Re: [RFA]: BOOL coding standards (Was: Problemwith+numberWithBool:?), Kazunobu Kuriyama, 2004/02/10
- Re: [RFA]: BOOL coding standards (Was: Problemwith+numberWithBool:?), David Ayers, 2004/02/10
- Re: [RFA]: BOOL coding standards (Was: Problemwith+numberWithBool:?), Alexander Malmberg, 2004/02/10
- Re: [RFA]: BOOL coding standards (Was: Problemwith+numberWithBool:?), Nicola Pero, 2004/02/10