Re: [C/C++] PR 13358 long long and C++ do not mix well

[Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>]

Dave Korn wrote:

> /tmp/string-null-ctor.C:9: warning: null argument where non-null required
> (argument 1)
> 
>   Would either of you care to comment on what would be a suitable pattern to test?

I'd just say "null".  Or maybe "null pointer" (see below).

As a nit-pick on the message, and without having much context, I suggest
something like

  warning: argument is the null pointer

That's because (a) I like using terms of the standard, and "the null
pointer" is a term from the standard, where as just plain "null" isn't,
(b) once you point out it's null, I don't think you add much by saying
that what you want is something non-null.

As for the test question, to me "null" is the key word here.  Any good
warning message for this situation will say "null", and any message
that's talking about "null" is probably saying something useful.

My two cents,

-- 
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery
mark@codesourcery.com
(650) 331-3385 x713