Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2013 15:42:07 +0100 From: Luca Barbato <lu_zero@...too.org> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: NULL 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. IMHO going with 2+3 is the only safe way to grant musl more support Having a flag to turn those compatibility hacks off would be good. I wonder why in the hell C++ can't use the (void *) 0 definition or equivalent. 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.