微信公众号搜"智元新知"关注
微信扫一扫可直接关注哦!

C11_Generic将true和false推断为整数

在C11中,有_Generic宏可以允许很酷的泛型函数.但是,使用true和false会导致在正常情况下不正确的推论:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdbool.h>

#define TypeName(x) \
  _Generic((x),\
    bool: "bool",\
    int: "int",\
    default: "unkNown")

#if defined (__STDC_VERSION__) && (__STDC_VERSION__ >= 201112L) && (__bool_true_false_are_defined)
# undef true
# define true ((bool)(1))
# undef false
# define false ((bool)(0))
#endif

int main(void)
{
    printf("1: %s\n",TypeName(1));
    printf("true: %s\n",TypeName(true));
    printf("false: %s\n",TypeName(false));
}

这打印:

1: int
true: bool
false: bool

但是没有重新定义真假的中间位:

1: int
true: int
false: int

这意味着您无法执行_Generic功能,例如:

struct Variant * const int32 = variant_create(1);
struct Variant * const boolean = variant_create(true);

所以我的问题是:

>重新定义片段是安全的吗?
>这是C11标准中的疏忽还是GCC和Clang中的错误

解决方法

这两种类型都是宏:

7.18 Boolean type and values

  1. The remaining three macros are suitable for use in #if preprocessing directives.
    They are:
    true which expands to the integer constant 1,
    false which expands to the integer constant 0,
    and
    __bool_true_false_are_defined which expands to the integer constant 1.

最后一条规则说您可以重新定义宏:

  1. Notwithstanding the provisions of 7.1.3,a program may undefine and perhaps then
    redefine the macros bool,true,and false. 259)

    259) See ‘‘future library directions’’ (7.31.9)

尽管引用了规则:

7.1.3 Reserved identifiers

  1. If the program removes (with #undef) any macro deFinition of an identifier in the first
    group listed above,the behavior is undefined.

规则7.31.9说重新定义可能不是一个好主意:

7.31.9 Boolean type and values

  1. The ability to undefine and perhaps then redefine the macros bool,and false is
    an obsolescent feature.

所以我建议你创建自己的my_true和my_false宏,这些宏被转换为_Bool.

原文地址:https://www.jb51.cc/c/116175.html

版权声明:本文内容由互联网用户自发贡献,该文观点与技术仅代表作者本人。本站仅提供信息存储空间服务,不拥有所有权,不承担相关法律责任。如发现本站有涉嫌侵权/违法违规的内容, 请发送邮件至 dio@foxmail.com 举报,一经查实,本站将立刻删除。

相关推荐