[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
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.
