Re: [v3] Remove uses of <cstddef> as an implementation detail

[Gennaro Prota <gennaro dot prota at yahoo dot com>]

On 07/06/2010 19.24, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> On 06/07/2010 06:54 PM, Gennaro Prota wrote:
> > On 03/06/2010 21.19, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > this, largely boring patch essentially does what the Subject says, thus
> > > following the spirit of LWG 1250, avoiding uses of C-style NULLs,
> > > trimming the size of the C++ headers. I took also the occasion to add
> > > std::nullptr_t, in C++0x mode.
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'm just turning up in these parts so my apologies if this has
> > been discussed and decided upon earlier, but why would one want
> > such a modification? Just to save on the amount of parsed code?
> See the quick summary above. In general we have been untangling and
> cleaning up the dependencies in the headers for a while.

I saw the summary but was perplexed, especially about removing
NULL; why giving up using it rather than just defining it in a
"sub-header", as done for std::size_t and std::ptrdiff_t?

Or do you mean that, then, you'd have a dependency on the
sub-header, whereas using 0 directly you haven't any?

(I'm just worrying a bit about code clarity; for this case but
also for the future, if the guideline is that anything not
indispensable is better removed)

--
  Gennaro Prota         |           name.surname yahoo.com
    Breeze C++ (preview): <https://sourceforge.net/projects/breeze/>
    Do you need expertise in C++?   I'm available.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com