|
Message-ID: <50ED86D8.6070204@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2013 16:03:52 +0100 From: Luca Barbato <lu_zero@...too.org> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: NULL On 09/01/13 15:47, Rich Felker wrote: > On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 03:42:07PM +0100, Luca Barbato wrote: >> On 09/01/13 12:02, John Spencer wrote: >>> 2) change musl so it is compatible with those apps. this would mean: >>> #if defined(__GNUC__) && defined(__cplusplus__) >>> #define NULL __null >>> #elif defined (__cplusplus__) >>> #define NULL 0 >>> #else >>> #define NULL (void *) 0 /* for C code */ >>> #end >>> this change is the easiest solution: any problem will be magically fixed. >> >> I'm not sure if there is a way to warn properly at compile time for that >> specific usage. > > __attribute__ ((sentinel)) may be used. Adding this to the appropriate > gtk headers (even just as a temporary debugging measure if it's not > desirable permanently) would catch all the bugs calling gtk variadic > functions. That would be worthy notwithstanding. >> IMHO going with 2+3 is the only safe way to grant musl more support > > 2 is not appropriate as written (it's more complexity, and ugly, and > in multiple locations). 3 already exists; it's called GCC. =/ >> I wonder why in the hell C++ can't use the (void *) 0 definition or >> equivalent. > > Because then char *s = NULL; would be a constraint violation. Indeed, how foolish of me. lu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.