Replies: 2 comments 4 replies
-
The only logical explanation I've heard is that if you're blindly replacing @valkey-io/core-team I marked this as a major decision. Let's vote about it. ( 👍 / 👎 ) |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
4 replies
-
The majority of TSC have vote forbit, so consider this accepted. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
-
Can anyone explain why we continue to persecute the lowly
bool
?The boolean type was formally added in C99 (25 years ago!). Yes, it required a special header, but so do a lot of things. As of C23, bool is a first class type, using reserved words for
bool
/true
/false
. Yet bool continues to be discriminated against in Valkey.Booleans are more readable and expressive. When there’s an
int
representing 0/1/false/true - a reader never really knows for sure that it’s ALWAYS 0/1 (or even that 0/1 necessarily represent false/true). A boolean conveys a clear intent - AND THE COMPILER ENFORCES IT.I’ve heard people say “We don’t use bool because <insert name> doesn’t like bool”. But should we give into peer pressure and join the haters? I say NO!
This is Valkey now. It’s a brave new world. Let’s shed the shackles of “bool hate”. Rise up and be a force for love in the world!
Let’s face it, we use
goto
all over the place - and that’s the evil construct that our computer science instructors all warned us about. We use other C99 additions likeinline
functions andlong long
. We useenum
. Is it somehow more palatable to do this?As one of the few people here who was actually using C before C99, I say enough is enough.
‘Cause the good old days weren’t always good.
And tomorrow ain’t as bad as it seems.
- Billy Joel
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions