Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 16:39:23 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: Mark Murray <mark@grondar.org> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: NULL vs 0 vs 0L bikeshed time Message-ID: <20040302163419.M8656@gamplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <200402291546.i1TFkZ0w070591@grimreaper.grondar.org> References: <200402291546.i1TFkZ0w070591@grimreaper.grondar.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040302163419.M8656>