Shouldn't bool be initialized to 0xFF ?

[Bruno Medeiros]

Lionello Lunesu wrote:
> I've been following those "why's char init'ed to -1?" / "why's float 
> init'ed to NaN?" thread, and I'd have to agree with Walter: a crazy 
> initialization sure makes it obvious where the problem lies.
> 
> So: why isn't "bool" initialized to 0xFF too? In dmd v0.164, bool.init 
> is 0, which is a valid value for bool. For byte/int/long I get it, since 
> there is no invalid value for byte/int/long. But for bool there is, so 
> the same reasoning as char/float applies.
> 
> We could even name 0xFF "Not A Bool" ;)
> 
> L.

You are right that it would be more consistent to have a "Not a Bool" 
value. But this should not be implemented because of performance 
implications: It would slow down conversions from int to bool, as well 
as any kind of bool access/use, where a check for Not A Bool would have 
to be made (and an exception thrown when necessary).
   b1 == b2   // has to check if b1 or b2 is NotABool
   if(b1)  // has to check if b1 is NotABool

-- 
Bruno Medeiros - MSc in CS/E student
http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?BrunoMedeiros#D