This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Warning for unadorned 0 in varargs lists?


 > My concern was about differentiating between 0 and NULL. If you care
 > about what works in practise, you should warn about neither; if you
 > care about pedantic standard compliance, you should warn for both.
 >    Falk

I used to feel as you do, that since 0 works in practice we should
silently accept it.  But it costs the user nothing to switch to NULL
in their code and may in fact fix a bug where some 64-bit ABI doesn't
do padding for unadorned 0.

Forcing the user to write NULL instead of 0 even if in practice 0 may
be okay is just like e.g. requiring double parens around assignments
used as truth values.

If the user really wants integer zero, they can supply the third
argument `sentinel_value' with an int type.

		--Kaveh
--
Kaveh R. Ghazi			ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]