[PATCH] Revert "llvm-c/lto.h: Avoid use of bool."

[Chandler Carruth]

On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote:

> Er, if it's a C89 compiler (MSVC), bool isn't really reserved for the
> implementation now, is it?
>

Nope, it also isn't reserved for LLVM's libraries though. I don't think we
want to stomp on the global namespace that way.


> This interface is supposed to be stable.  On Linux we've used the C99
> _Bool type and C++ bool type interchangeably and we need to keep doing so.
>
> Are you suggesting I invent a new lto_bool_t typedef which is bool when
> available and a same-sized C type on Windows, and then apply that
> everywhere?
>

Yea, I think we need something like llvm_lto_bool_t or whatever that is
ours to control. =[ grotesque...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20131024/f4b5afe4/attachment.html>