On 29-Aug-2012, Bastien ROUCARIES wrote: | n Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 7:36 PM, John W. Eaton <j...@gnu.org> wrote: | > On 29-Aug-2012, Paul Eggert wrote: | > | > | On 08/29/2012 10:00 AM, John W. Eaton wrote: | > | > Why define true, false, and bool to anything when using C++? | > | | > | Maybe it's for '#ifdef bool' but to be honest I'm just doing what | > | GCC does. Perhaps you can ask the GCC developers why they do did | > | it that way.... | > | | > | Anyway, I'd be surprised if Octave cares whether true, false, and bool | > | are macros. If it does, then it's broken on GNUish hosts anyway, | > | right? And if it doesn't, the gnulib patch should work as-is. | > | > No, I don't think Octave currently has any checks like this. | > | > For C++ code, I think '#ifdef bool' will be false. So | > '#define bool bool' switches the meaning. Should that happen if | > stdbool.h has been included? I don't know. | | echo -e "#include <stdbool.h> \n #ifdef bool \n echo \n#endif" | g++ -E - | | # 1 "<stdin>" | # 1 "<built-in>" | # 1 "<command-line>" | # 1 "<stdin>" | # 1 "/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/4.6/include/stdbool.h" 1 3 4 | # 2 "<stdin>" 2 | | echo
I understand that this is what currently happens. I'm just wondering if that is really the right thing. jwe
