While listening to Paul Edwards Pete heard:Filename Expansion

G'day Paul

 PC> of success or failure you have to use something, perhaps

 PC> enum {SUCCESS, FAILURE};

 PC> would be better?.

 PE> Definitely not.  0 and 1 are best.  0 and non-zero are
 PE> well-defined, you can read ANY book on C, and find out that 0 is
 PE> false and non-zero is true.  When you start redefining the
 PE> language by putting in crap like #define SUCCESS 1, you have to
 PE> chain back through header files looking for where it is defined,
 PE> because you're now using "Joe Blogg's C" instead of standard C.

The above enum was just an example i don't use that myself however i
do have other bad habits that you wouldn't approve of :-),  also i was
going to disagree with you on the paragraph above until i gave it some
thought and looked at it from the perspective of someone else trying
to read my code, Though i still think named constants will return more
information to the person reading the code in some instances than just
numeric values.

 PE> If it was so good, they would have included it as part of the
 PE> standard.  Just like that TCXL dickhead defining IntT as short
 PE> or something.  It's just crap.

Afraid i'm not familiar with TCXL, what is it, some sort of addon
library.

   -=Pete=-


--- OMX/Blue Wave v2.12