::std::boolalpha

[Stefan Ram]

Some books always #include <ios> and then »write«
::std::boolalpha before they print some boolean values.
It really is so natural: you print »false«, and there it
is written: »false«!

Why do you think the creators of C++ have decided to make
us use ::std::boolalpha, instead of making this the default
behavior and require to use ::std::noboolalpha or
::std::boolnumeric when numerals are wanted?

 

[Luca Risolia]

Some books always #include <ios> and then »write«
::std::boolalpha before they print some boolean values.
It really is so natural: you print »false«, and there it
is written: »false«!

Why do you think the creators of C++ have decided to make
us use ::std::boolalpha, instead of making this the default
behavior and require to use ::std::noboolalpha or
::std::boolnumeric when numerals are wanted?

because "numerals" do not depend on locales?

 

[Luca Risolia]

The literal »true« does not depend on locales. A direct printing
of a bool value anyways only seems to make sense for teaching or
debugging purposes. Therefore, it would not hurt to always print
»true« as English »true« - independent of the locale.

The universal way to print "true" as English "true" - independent of the
locale - is to print a number: "1".

 

[Stefan Ram]

because "numerals" do not depend on locales?

The literal »true« does not depend on locales. A direct printing
of a bool value anyways only seems to make sense for teaching or
debugging purposes. Therefore, it would not hurt to always print
»true« as English »true« - independent of the locale.