From owner-freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Nov 28 22:43:35 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B693F16A4CE
	for <standards@freebsd.org>; Fri, 28 Nov 2003 22:43:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from harmony.village.org (rover.bsdimp.com [204.144.255.66])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0DEC43FD7
	for <standards@freebsd.org>; Fri, 28 Nov 2003 22:43:34 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com)
Received: from localhost (warner@rover2.village.org [10.0.0.1])
	by harmony.village.org (8.12.9p2/8.12.9) with ESMTP id hAT6hReO003662;
	Fri, 28 Nov 2003 23:43:27 -0700 (MST)
	(envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com)
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 23:43:25 -0700 (MST)
Message-Id: <20031128.234325.35797703.imp@bsdimp.com>
To: marcel@xcllnt.net
From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com>
In-Reply-To: <20031129055619.GA48381@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net>
References: <20031129005823.GA20090@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net>
	<20031129161509.J4841@gamplex.bde.org>
	<20031129055619.GA48381@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net>
X-Mailer: Mew version 2.1 on Emacs 21.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
cc: standards@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: 64-bit NULL: a followup
X-BeenThere: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Standards compliance <freebsd-standards.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-standards>,
	<mailto:freebsd-standards-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-standards>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-standards@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-standards-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-standards>,
	<mailto:freebsd-standards-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 06:43:35 -0000

In message: <20031129055619.GA48381@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net>
            Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net> writes:
: Ok, so what is better (void*)0 or 0L?

Short answer:
	Yes. "Is it quicker to Philadelphia or by bus?"

Longer answer:

Each definition helps to flush out certain kinds of bugs while
papering over other kinds of bugs.  It needs to be 0L for C++, but in
C either is fine.  I have traditionally had the opposite in my tree
than what the current FreeBSD definition is to catch the other kinds
of bugs that others don't see with the default definition.  Neither
one is clearly better or worse than the other in the general case.

Warner