On 12/4/23 05:57, Bruno Haible wrote:
In both cases, the ability to add NULL + 0 unifies code paths for
empty arrays and non-empty arrays. Such unified code paths are desirable:
they make the code look simpler.
...
Paul, is the attached patch OK with you?
Thanks, but I'm of two minds about that sort of thing. On the one hand,
they document the assumption that (char *) NULL + 0 == NULL. On the
other, they are still clutter and this assumption is safe on all but
pedantic platforms -- and we've long not worried about pedantic
platforms (e.g., gcc -pedantic), for good reason.
Of course, the fact that you found these issues with clang's runtime
checking does not mean that these are all the issues; I fully expect
that there are others.
All in all, it may be better to leave the code alone.
PS. The name END_OF_ARRAY is not the best, since a null pointer does not
point to an array, and even when the pointer is non-null the macro can
be used to point elsewhere than to the end of an array. A better name
would be something like PTR_ADD, since the first arg is the pointer, the
second arg the amount to add.