> > > http://codereview.appspot.com/5014044/diff/1/lib/Parse/Parser.cpp#newcode1282 > lib/Parse/Parser.cpp:1282: IdentifierInfo *CorrectedII = NULL; > s/NULL/0/ >
I know it's fairly common, but certainly not universal, & I've been meaning to bring this up as a point of discussion (after the thread with Doug about potentially adding warnings for non-nullptr null pointer literals in C++0x): Should we consider NULL as the appropriate null pointer literal, rather than 0? Since it provides warning/checking that seems at least somewhat helpful. (& at some point I'd like to implement the style checker we discussed to verify that all null pointer literals are NULL, nullptr, etc) Otherwise if 0 is really considered the right way to go I'd be happy to go fix all the existing NULL usage, if that's preferred. - David
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
