Quuxplusone added inline comments.
================
Comment at: include/ostream:225
+ basic_ostream& operator<<(nullptr_t)
+ { return *this << (const void*)0; }
+
----------------
mclow.lists wrote:
> lichray wrote:
> > Oh, common, I persuaded the committee to allow you to print a `(null)` and
> > you don't do it...
> I think that `(null)` is a better thing to output here than `0x0`.
Are you two implying that
*this << (const void *)0;
does *not* print `(null)`? It certainly should, IMO. (I mean, it'll call
`num_put` for `void*` in the current locale, but I would naturally expect that
to print `(null)`.)
Anyway, whether the current locale prints null as `(null)` or not, there is
great potential utility in using the same format for all pointers, as K-ballo
is doing here. I'd really like to be able to
std::ostringstream oss;
oss << nullptr; // equivalently: oss << (void*)0;
void *p;
std::istringstream(oss.str()) >> p; // should read in a null pointer, not
derp out
FWIW, it looks like libc++ currently *does* print null pointers as `(nil)`,
which is not quite the same thing as `(null)`. libstdc++ prints them as `0`.
https://wandbox.org/permlink/yAM6tjMzvEX9HhhE
https://reviews.llvm.org/D33776
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
