-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 03/27/2015 03:17, Michael Thayer wrote: > On 26.03.2015 20:48, Jung-uk Kim wrote: >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 >> >> On 03/26/2015 15:25, Michal Necasek wrote: >>> Sorry, I wasn't clear. By "what is the semantic difference" I >>> meant "under what circumstances will the conditional behave >>> differently". There must be some difference because otherwise >>> what would be the point of a warning? >> >> As I said, it does not behave differently under any >> circumstances. It just shuts up compiler warnings. I think the >> warning is to make sure its author is using a correct variable, >> i.e., "A variable of type foo is used where type bar should be >> used. Do you really want me to convert it to type bar?" or >> something like that. >> >> Some people say it's too noisy but I didn't write the compiler. >> :-P > > I wonder whether it would not make sense to at least get in touch > with the compiler people here to find out their rationale for the > warning and potentially open a bug report with them - "if (ptr)" is > a very well-established convention in C and C++ programming.
I misinterpreted the warnings. It warns not because of "if (ptr)" but because of "if (NULL)", i.e., "-Wnull-conversion" (Clang) or "-Wconversion-null" (GCC). My apologies, Jung-uk Kim -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJVFYjqAAoJEHyflib82/FGvA8H/1i+pL/k1FF4yyrGYz23yI43 SvcL8Zb/EWoPxmDZpM+rhNFH6v9W2Kh+LG0io5rUK7TA4cBuCZhGBm6LM+PaZRum 99YKC/6PYFvYDiuzIAhKsSXxxPclsRStw5MYgU9ku+GPZsBuu6ivf/A0unEtYf/s 60dOlVK/wItiw4xa/wr2iAYSIhqNChfPNmpEcorrXtW2vrV1OFvJOmI52jRdtZDn DpuVn5dnzPRQ9F8sBskb3LO6jbIhOQ5vmw/O0MHaTFmLnzEX34qKeVDwYXZ60wbS +TE9ZBVwkQEzDRsaUiFQ+0ncagJL0+MF0hXQvqprTnjO9xFfStItjkycObKTpc0= =KzJk -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ vbox-dev mailing list [email protected] https://www.virtualbox.org/mailman/listinfo/vbox-dev
