I stumbled about a Cppcheck warning (an inconclusive one), that I mistakenly use

Question

I stumbled about a Cppcheck warning (an inconclusive one), that I mistakenly used & instead of &&:

/// @param code identifies the command. Only the lower 16 bits of are being processed
int encodeCmdState(bool finished, int code, bool errorneous)
{
    return
        (finished & 1) |
        ((code & 0xffff)<<1) |
        ((err & 1)<< 17);
}
I'm not sure if this code (style) reaches back into times where bool wasn't available in C. My first idea would be to simply strip the & 1 normalization from the bool parts. But I want to be sure, so...

Is shifting bool values "portable" and "safe"? Or, more generally:

Does the implicit bool-to-int conversation in arithmetic expressions always normalize values?

Explanation / Answer

According to the C++ standard,

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse I
• Subjects