[Bug c++/33403] "warning: missing sentinel in function call" for 0 rather than NULL
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-12 09:18 --- (In reply to comment #2) > I don't know about "most likely." sizeof(int) == sizeof(void*) is still pretty > common, so my guess would be that the warning is more often wrong than not. Common on ILP32 targets but since this was reported for LP64 target anyways, what is the difference. Remember sizeof(int) might be equal to sizeof(void*) on most targets but it does not have to. In fact this warning is for portability reasons (though in this case is also correctness). -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33403
[Bug c++/33403] "warning: missing sentinel in function call" for 0 rather than NULL
--- Comment #2 from sebor at roguewave dot com 2007-09-12 03:56 --- (In reply to comment #1) > This is not a bug, 0 will be pasted as the same size as an int which means it > will most likely not be passed as the same size as a NULL pointer. I don't know about "most likely." sizeof(int) == sizeof(void*) is still pretty common, so my guess would be that the warning is more often wrong than not. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33403
[Bug c++/33403] "warning: missing sentinel in function call" for 0 rather than NULL
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-12 00:27 --- This is not a bug, 0 will be pasted as the same size as an int which means it will most likely not be passed as the same size as a NULL pointer. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33403
