On Wednesday 03 September 2008 11:18:37 you wrote: > Kamil Dudka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Wednesday 03 September 2008 11:03:22 you wrote: > >> Kamil Dudka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Since both arguments are already bool I see no need for LOG_EQ (it's the > >> only use anyway). > > > > If you are using type bool, there is no guarantee there will be bool > > (0/1) value inside. > > RTFS. It _is_ guaranteed. Even if bool != C99 _Bool. Good to know. Thanks! I was warned in school to avoid comparing bool values some time ago :-) But I hope two more exclamation marks will not hurt anyone.
Kamil _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
