https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111281
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2023-09-05
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Frank Heckenbach from comment #3)
> - 'nonnull' is a GCC attribute, and quoting it makes it look like it refers
> to that, rather than to being a reference. If you can't easily track the
> provenance, a wording like "non-null argument (reference or 'nonnull'
> attribute)" might be better.
Yes, we shouldn't mention an attribute that is implicitly added by GCC, not
actually present in the code.
> - 'NULL' is a macro (and very much a deprecated one since we have nullptr),
> and both that and the comparison are generated by the compiler and not part
> of the code, so a wording like "compared to nullptr or converted to bool"
> might be better.
Yes, we should not use "NULL" to mean a null pointer.
Using nullptr would be wrong too, because in `if (ptr)` or `if (ptr != 0)`
there's no nullptr keyword or nullptr_t object.
We should say "null" or "null pointer".
Confirmed.
