On 11/13/05 2:05 PM, "Robert Ramey"
Daryle Walker wrote:
3a. In fact, I made a shocking realization researching for this thread. The standard describes "bool" in section 3.9.1, paragraph 6. Unlike "wchar_t" (described in paragraph 5), the "bool" does not have to be a rip-off of another built-in integral type!
I would be shocked to discover that wchar_t does have to be a rip-off of another built in integral type. The only compiler I test on that doesn't have wchar_t as an intrinsic type is VC 6.0. Should we be altering jam toolset to besure tha wchar_t is a synonnym for something else?
I do _not_ mean that "wchar_t" is a "typedef"! It is considered a separate type. It is implemented like a "strong type-alias"[1] of another built-in integral type, just like "char" is a strong type-alias of either "signed char" and "unsigned char". The "bool" type could be of an underlying built-in type that is otherwise unreachable in code, and that type doesn't even have to be integral, just act that way through the compiler. [1] C and C++ don't have this feature in general, although some wish for it. Other languages do have this. I think Ada is an example. -- Daryle Walker Mac, Internet, and Video Game Junkie darylew AT hotmail DOT com