Charles Angelich wrote in a message to Bo Simonsen:

BS>>>> if(function(parm) == TRUE) nessersary or could I use
BS>>>> if(function(parm)) ? 

RT>>> I think a better definition would be to #define FALSE 0
RT>>> and TRUE !FALSE - in other words, nonzero. 

BS>>> Hmm.. How could the compiler handle that? 

RT>> The compiler? The preprocessor would take care of it... 

BS> Yes but FALSE isn't explicit defined. 

 CA> Not sure but I think there is some misunderstanding going on here. 

 CA> Both you and Roy are including code within paragraphs of
 CA> English that obscures the meaning(s). 

 CA> You have "if(function(parm)) ?" in your text - the
"?" happens to
 CA> have a 'meaning' within the C language that I don't think you
 CA> intended to refer to. 

 CA> Roy has "#define FALSE 0 and TRUE !FALSE" within his text and I
 CA> think Roy _meant_: 

 CA> #define FALSE 0 

 CA> #define TRUE !FALSE 

That's correct.

 CA> The "and" appears to be pseudo code as it is within the text minus
 CA> another "#define" statement.

Ok.

 CA> Generally it is best to keep the lines of code separate in
 CA> messages rather than included within a paragraph. It is too
 CA> easy for the meaning of a particular line of code to be
 CA> misunderstood when the end of the code line is not obvious?  

I'm looking at html where this exact thing comes up,  and the people who
write such stuff _do_ tend to set it off,  both with whitespace and also
typically with things like   around the code part...

I don't know when I posted that without going back and looking,  maybe I
was tired at the time?

---