util: Implement boolean conversion and !operator for uint* #13388

pull qmma70 wants to merge 5 commits into bitcoin:master from qmma70:uint_bool changing 4 files +50 −17

qmma70 commented at 2:58 AM on June 4, 2018: contributor
First time contributor
1. Implement boolean conversion and operator!() for uint160/uint256 to be consistent with https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/arith_uint256.h#L67
2. Implement boolean conversion operator for arith_uint256
3. Add unit tests for (1) and (2)
qmma70 renamed this:
util: Implement boolean conversion and !operator for uint_*
util: Implement boolean conversion and !operator for uint*
on Jun 4, 2018
add c++11 contor to class uint_error 42dfcf9d06
implement boolean conversion for uint a12ea1e13e
qmma70 force-pushed on Jun 4, 2018
fix code formatting issue a9dadc31c6
qmma70 force-pushed on Jun 4, 2018
Empact commented at 9:18 AM on June 5, 2018: member

Prefer removing this as per #13396.
DrahtBot commented at 5:46 PM on June 5, 2018: member
Note to reviewers: This pull request conflicts with the following ones:
- #13396 (Drop unused arith_uint256 ! operator by Empact)
If you consider this pull request important, please also help to review the conflicting pull requests. Ideally, start with the one that should be merged first.
qmma70 commented at 11:20 PM on June 5, 2018: contributor

The operators are good to haves IMO.

But I'll close this one if #13396 is merged.
skeees commented at 12:21 AM on June 6, 2018: contributor

I'm a concept ACK on rationalizing the apis, note that there's code overlap with uint256::IsNull() so consider having one call the other
call isNull() from operator bool 1137caef56
fix lint; move test cases to the right place 4d8a172c5c
laanwj commented at 5:14 AM on June 7, 2018: member

I'm not sure it makes sense to add more unused methods. Also looks like this makes a lot of changes not directly related to the topic, please try to avoid that.

I'm starting to prefer #13396 as well.

To elaborate: At first removing the method seemed strange, but when I saw that the opposite method didn't exist either, my idea of API symmetry fell apart and removing the unused method seems better than doubling down on it and adding even more.
laanwj commented at 5:21 PM on June 7, 2018: member

Closing because #13396 merged
laanwj closed this on Jun 7, 2018
MarcoFalke locked this on Sep 8, 2021

Contributors