2 ms·
>> As a C99 feature, bool is too little, too late; had it been part of C89, things might be different. I'm failing to understand this line. Can you be more exp
by kumarharsh 13y ago
>> As a C99 feature, bool is too little, too late; had it been part of C89, things might be different.
I'm failing to understand this line. Can you be more explicit why it's bad now, and would have been good earlier?
- Kliment 13y agoBecause lots of compilers in common use, particularly from Microsoft, don't support C99 so to work around their assheadedness you have to put in compatibility workarounds. Those workarounds behave differently from compiler-implemented bool, and the risk of errors from those inconsistencies is significantly greater than the benefit of using bool in code.
- stephencanon 13y ago"Lots of" compilers in common use? Can you name one besides Microsoft's?