- char a[true == 1 ? 1 : -1];
- char b[false == 0 ? 1 : -1];
- char c[__bool_true_false_are_defined == 1 ? 1 : -1];
- char d[(bool) 0.5 == true ? 1 : -1];
- bool e = &s;
- char f[(_Bool) 0.0 == false ? 1 : -1];
- char g[true];
- char h[sizeof (_Bool)];
- char i[sizeof s.t];
- enum { j = false, k = true, l = false * true, m = true * 256 };
- _Bool n[m];
- char o[sizeof n == m * sizeof n[0] ? 1 : -1];
- char p[-1 - (_Bool) 0 < 0 && -1 - (bool) 0 < 0 ? 1 : -1];
- #if defined __xlc__ || defined __GNUC__
- /* Catch a bug in IBM AIX xlc compiler version 6.0.0.0
- reported by James Lemley on 2005-10-05; see
- http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2005-10/msg00086.html
- This test is not quite right, since xlc is allowed to
- reject this program, as the initializer for xlcbug is
- not one of the forms that C requires support for.
- However, doing the test right would require a run-time
- test, and that would make cross-compilation harder.
- Let us hope that IBM fixes the xlc bug, and also adds
- support for this kind of constant expression. In the
- meantime, this test will reject xlc, which is OK, since
- our stdbool.h substitute should suffice. We also test
- this with GCC, where it should work, to detect more
- quickly whether someone messes up the test in the
- future. */
- char digs[] = "0123456789";
- int xlcbug = 1 / (&(digs + 5)[-2 + (bool) 1] == &digs[4] ? 1 : -1);
- #endif
- /* Catch a bug in an HP-UX C compiler. See
- http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-12/msg02303.html
- http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2005-11/msg00161.html
- */
- _Bool q = true;
- _Bool *pq = &q;
- ],
- [
- *pq |= q;
- *pq |= ! q;
- /* Refer to every declared value, to avoid compiler optimizations. */
- return (!a + !b + !c + !d + !e + !f + !g + !h + !i + !!j + !k + !!l
- + !m + !n + !o + !p + !q + !pq);
- ],
- [ac_cv_header_stdbool_h=yes],
- [ac_cv_header_stdbool_h=no])])
+ struct s { Bool s: 1; Bool t; bool u: 1; bool v; } s;
+
+ char a[true == 1 ? 1 : -1];
+ char b[false == 0 ? 1 : -1];
+ char c[__bool_true_false_are_defined == 1 ? 1 : -1];
+ char d[(bool) 0.5 == true ? 1 : -1];
+ /* See body of main program for 'e'. */
+ char f[(Bool) 0.0 == false ? 1 : -1];
+ char g[true];
+ char h[sizeof (Bool)];
+ char i[sizeof s.t];
+ enum { j = false, k = true, l = false * true, m = true * 256 };
+ /* The following fails for
+ HP aC++/ANSI C B3910B A.05.55 [Dec 04 2003]. */
+ Bool n[m];
+ char o[sizeof n == m * sizeof n[0] ? 1 : -1];
+ char p[-1 - (Bool) 0 < 0 && -1 - (bool) 0 < 0 ? 1 : -1];
+ /* Catch a bug in an HP-UX C compiler. See
+ https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-12/msg02303.html
+ https://lists.gnu.org/r/bug-coreutils/2005-11/msg00161.html
+ */
+ Bool q = true;
+ Bool *pq = &q;
+ bool *qq = &q;
+ ]],
+ [[
+ bool e = &s;
+ *pq |= q; *pq |= ! q;
+ *qq |= q; *qq |= ! q;
+ /* Refer to every declared value, to avoid compiler optimizations. */
+ return (!a + !b + !c + !d + !e + !f + !g + !h + !i + !!j + !k + !!l
+ + !m + !n + !o + !p + !q + !pq + !qq);
+ ]])],
+ [ac_cv_header_stdbool_h=yes],
+ [ac_cv_header_stdbool_h=no])])