Lloyd Fuller wrote <begin extract> And then you have C / C++ that uses RC=1 as the good return code. Any other is bad. </end extract>
This practice reflects another C design defect. In the absence of an explicit boolean data type, C uses the dubious but ineluctable convention that a coded-arithmetic value of 1 represents truth and one of zero represents falsity. Values that are not 1, truth, are then by extension treated as representations of falsity. In and only in a UNIX | C/C++ ernvironment this convention has merit. Given the fraught decision to dispense with an explicit boolean data type, I cannot think of a convention that would be less objectionable; it makes the best of a bad situation; and it is also an interesting, all but unique instance of a retreat from the facilities that FORTRAN IV makes available in C, which is a very much more FORTRAN-like language than it is usually understood to be. John Gilmore, Ashland, MA 01721 - USA ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
