--nextPart3528207.OcalFe3CRj
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-2"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

Le Lundi 4 Octobre 2004 16:14, Jaros=B3aw Staniek a =E9crit=A0:
> Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote:
> > Maybe I am old-fashioned, but I prefer the traditional C-way of
> > representing this:
> > int ret;
> > ret>0 -> true
> > ret=3D=3D0 -> false
> > ret<0 -> error/exception
> >
> > It provides more than one abnormal termination type, which you often
> > need, and this scheme can also handle any function with positive integer
> > return-types.
>
> Depends whether we want to read documentation or have self-documented cod=
e.
> To montion C-style, there is also other standard behaviour where 0 means
> true.
>
> On the other hand, I am (ans we all) also still _using_ ints for wider
> cases. But there was so many cases for functions using 3-state logic that
> I've found the class usable.

Why not a simple enum ?
In most case, an enum is more redable then a bool if you give meaningfull=20
names to the enum members.

--nextPart3528207.OcalFe3CRj
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBBYZAmz58lY8jWrL0RAs+4AJ9448u5eqrd+z38/QW04Y32x43HMgCfXHnt
e0hcQfbzxEXk2ZroqrjbNVs=
=omzU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--nextPart3528207.OcalFe3CRj--