Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 17:46:41 +0100 From: Marc Olzheim <marcolz@stack.nl> To: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> Cc: Mark Murray <mark@grondar.org> Subject: Re: NULL vs 0 vs 0L bikeshed time Message-ID: <20040303164641.GA94900@stack.nl> In-Reply-To: <20040302163419.M8656@gamplex.bde.org> References: <200402291546.i1TFkZ0w070591@grimreaper.grondar.org> <20040302163419.M8656@gamplex.bde.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 04:39:23PM +1100, Bruce Evans wrote: > > The intent is to catch use of NULL where 0 or (0L) should be used. > > It generates extra warnings (I promise to fix these). > > This may involve fixing hundreds if not thousands of ports. Mwah, I've been running with a similar patch for three years now and haven't encountered any real problems... Marc
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040303164641.GA94900>