Date: Sun, 3 Dec 2000 23:19:33 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <jruigrok@via-net-works.nl> Cc: Will Andrews <will@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.bin/make arch.c compat.c cond.c dir.c hash.c job.c job.h list.h lst.h main.c make.c make.h parse.c sprite.h suff.c targ.c var.c src/usr.bin/make/lst.lib lstAppend.c lstConcat.c lstDatum.c lstDeQueue.c lstDestroy.c lstDupl.c ... Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0012032311140.843-100000@besplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <20001203103635.B42633@lucifer.bart.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 3 Dec 2000, Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote: > -On [20001203 09:15], Bruce Evans (bde@zeta.org.au) wrote: > >On Sat, 2 Dec 2000, Will Andrews wrote: > >> Log: > >> There's no reason to use fancy forms of NULL. Replace all instances > >> of NIL, NILLST, NILLGNODE, etc. with NULL. > > > >K&R support is one reason. > > In what way? foo(NULL) is an error if there is no prototype [in scope] for foo(). Non-erroneous K&R code would use foo((something *)0) or equivalent. The equivalent: #define NILSOMETHING ((something *)NULL) ... foo(NILSOMETHING); is probably preferable to casting 0 or NULL all over the place. Once NILSOMETHING is defined, using it everywhere is probably preferable to using it only in functiobn calls. This seems to be why the make(1) sources used it. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0012032311140.843-100000>