Re: NULL vs 0 vs 0L bikeshed time

From: Bruce Evans <bde_at_zeta.org.au>
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 16:39:23 +1100 (EST)
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004, Mark Murray wrote:

> ...
> I'd like to commit the following patch. It makes sure that for C
> and the kernel, NULL is a ((void *)0), and for C++, NULL is either
> (0L) or 0, with __LP64__ used to define the difference.
>
> The intent is to catch use of NULL where 0 or (0L) should be used.
> It generates extra warnings (I promise to fix these).

This may involve fixing hundreds if not thousands of ports.

Bruce
Received on Mon Mar 01 2004 - 20:39:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:45 UTC