Re: Style Question

From: Kyle Moffett
Date: Sun Mar 11 2007 - 18:02:33 EST


On Mar 11, 2007, at 16:41:51, Daniel Hazelton wrote:
On Sunday 11 March 2007 16:35:50 Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Mar 11 2007 22:15, Cong WANG wrote:
So can I say using NULL is better than 0 in kernel?

On what basis? Do you even know what NULL is defined as in (C, not C++) userspace? Think about it.

IIRC, the glibc and GCC headers define NULL as (void*)0 :)

On the other hand when __cplusplus is defined they define it to the "__null" builtin, which GCC uses to give type conversion errors for "int foo = NULL" but not "char *foo = NULL". A "((void *)0)" definition gives C++ type errors for both due to the broken C++ void pointer conversion problems.

Cheers,
Kyle Moffett

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/