svn commit: r283088 - head/sys/ddb

Pedro Giffuni pfg at FreeBSD.org
Tue May 19 03:50:08 UTC 2015


> Il giorno 18/mag/2015, alle ore 20:48, Bruce Evans <brde at optusnet.com.au> ha scritto:
> 
> On Mon, 18 May 2015, Pedro F. Giffuni wrote:
> 
>> Log:
>> ddb: stop boolean screaming.
>> 
>> TRUE --> true
>> FALSE--> false
>> 
>> Hinted by:	NetBSD
> 
> This is not just churn to a style regression, but a type mismatch.
> 

It is an attempt to reduce differences with NetBSD.

One of the complaints of hear from newcomers to the ddb code is that
the format is old-fashioned (it still had pre-ANSI headers not long ago)
and unmaintained.

>> Modified: head/sys/ddb/db_break.c
>> ==============================================================================
>> --- head/sys/ddb/db_break.c	Mon May 18 22:14:06 2015	(r283087)
>> +++ head/sys/ddb/db_break.c	Mon May 18 22:27:46 2015	(r283088)
>> @@ -155,12 +155,12 @@ db_find_breakpoint_here(db_addr_t addr)
>> 	return db_find_breakpoint(db_map_addr(addr), addr);
>> }
>> 
>> -static boolean_t	db_breakpoints_inserted = TRUE;
>> +static boolean_t	db_breakpoints_inserted = true;
> 
> This code hasn't been churned to use the boolean type.  It still uses
> boolean_t, which is plain int.  TRUE and FALSE go with this type.  true
> and false go with the boolean type.  This probably makes no difference,
> because TRUE happens to be implemented with the same value as true and
> there are lots of implicit versions between the types.
> 

Yes, I noticed the return types are still ints. It doesn’t look difficult
to convert it to use a real boolean type.  In any case, I would prefer to go
forward (using bool) instead of reverting this change.

> The boolean type is almost useless since C's type system is too weak to
> distinguish between plain int used as a boolean and pure boolean.  If
> it were stronger, then it would complain about all the implicit conversions
> between int and boolean, and the boolean type would be harder to use for
> other reasons.
> 

And I would like that to happen, but it would probably break a lot of legacy code.
I thought boolean_t was a transition type.


Pedro.



More information about the svn-src-all mailing list