2 ms·
> With int statuses, not with bools Which C historically did not have, so int played that role. The function is the same, and the existing idioms remain.
by masklinn 4y ago
> With int statuses, not with bools
Which C historically did not have, so int played that role. The function is the same, and the existing idioms remain.
- wruza 4y agoI find it strange to introduce real bools (which these macros return according to their official signatures) and then to assign them a meaning of a still-nonexistent but widely used C type. At least my C intuition stumbles upon that immediately, no matter how long I think about it. Ah, anyway, standard C/libc is basically a lost cause. It can’t get any worse, since you have to refer to a manual at every call to not step on a landmine.