>
> I've seen more than my fair share of tf = !!value; out there, which is
> just awful to read. It is very useful to have a defined way of
> determining the binary success or failure of an operation without
> having to understand whether -1, 1, 0, 38, or -129125 is success,
> failure, or indication of an error condition.
i'm not sure why a boolean type fixes this problem. using _Bool
in this case shoves some implicit magic into '=' that wasn't there
before and doesn't map at all to how the machine really works.
what's wrong with this?
if(tf != 0)
return 0;
return -1;
- erik
