[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [libvirt] libvirt boolean type



On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 03:34:42PM -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 01/14/2013 01:02 AM, Claudio Bley wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Nonetheless, I think it still would be valuable as point 2 and 3 still
> > hold. Just change the definition to:
> > 
> > typedef int virBool;
> 
> I'm not too fond of using the term 'bool' for anything tri-state - to
> me, bool implies exactly two states.  _Maybe_ you could get away with a
> typedef for a different name (virTristate?), but at some point, 'int' is
> so much easier to type than whatever new typedef, that I don't think we
> would be buying much with this proposal.

Yeah, I really just prefer the code as it is now.

Daniel
-- 
|: http://berrange.com      -o-    http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org              -o-             http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org       -o-         http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org       -o-       http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]