Avoid implicit casts from bool to CScriptNum.
Rationale: Explicit is better than implicit.
[script] Avoid implicit casts from bool to CScriptNum #11110
pull practicalswift wants to merge 1 commits into bitcoin:master from practicalswift:implicit-casts-from-bool-to-cscriptnum changing 1 files +11 −11-
practicalswift commented at 6:52 PM on August 22, 2017: contributor
-
script: Avoid implicit casts from bool to CScriptNum 350f5b3053
-
promag commented at 3:34 AM on August 23, 2017: member
There is no implicit cast here, instead it uses
CScriptNum& operator=( const int64_t& rhs).For that reason NACK as is.
-
practicalswift commented at 7:18 AM on August 23, 2017: contributor
@promag The conversion from
boolis clearly implicit, isn't it? -
promag commented at 10:06 AM on August 23, 2017: member
@practicalswift right, sorry, late night I thought you meant implicit construction.
- laanwj added the label Refactoring on Aug 23, 2017
- practicalswift renamed this:
script: Avoid implicit casts from bool to CScriptNum
[script] Avoid implicit casts from bool to CScriptNum
on Aug 23, 2017 -
ryanofsky commented at 8:45 PM on November 2, 2017: member
utACK 350f5b30533eebaf27d9a63c3d8d0bea3df3a291
Seems like a fine change, does what is described, don't really think it's good or bad.
-
laanwj commented at 9:06 AM on November 20, 2017: member
I really don't like doing unnecessary changes in consensus code. The implicit case from bool to int64 is fully defined behavior.
IMO, this also, doesn't make the code easier to understand, just longer.
Sorry, going to close this. If there is overwhelming agreement to do this we should reopen, but otherwise, meh.
- laanwj closed this on Nov 20, 2017
-
practicalswift commented at 10:08 AM on November 20, 2017: contributor
OK :-)
- practicalswift deleted the branch on Apr 10, 2021
- DrahtBot locked this on Aug 18, 2022
Contributors
Labels