Timeline for Why redefining `bool` primitives in 'SPL' as a typedef (rather than using stdbool.h)?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 10, 2014 at 3:21 | comment | added | abelinux |
Well.. yes @lethaljd but, there're other standard libraries included. E.g. check cslib.h: it includes stdio.h, stdlib.h and stddef.h. I think @Kareem has a point here.
|
|
| Dec 10, 2014 at 3:12 | comment | added | lethaljd | Would this allow the spl to be used independently and theoretically not require any additional libraries while still providing what would be considered a "standard" set of functionality? If so, that sounds like a good reason. | |
| Dec 9, 2014 at 20:32 | comment | added | kzidane |
I'm not sure, but maybe for compatibility with C89 and later versions since the type _Bool wasn't introduced to C until C99.
|
|
| Dec 8, 2014 at 22:36 | history | asked | abelinux | CC BY-SA 3.0 |