From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Feb 29 07:50:20 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82DA116A4CE
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Sun, 29 Feb 2004 07:50:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from storm.FreeBSD.org.uk (storm.FreeBSD.org.uk [194.242.157.42])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CC5843D1D
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Sun, 29 Feb 2004 07:50:17 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from mark@grondar.org)
Received: from storm.FreeBSD.org.uk (Ugrondar@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by storm.FreeBSD.org.uk (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i1TFoFjV049590
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Sun, 29 Feb 2004 15:50:16 GMT
	(envelope-from mark@grondar.org)
Received: (from Ugrondar@localhost)i1TFoFGI049589
	for current@freebsd.org; Sun, 29 Feb 2004 15:50:15 GMT
	(envelope-from mark@grondar.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: storm.FreeBSD.org.uk: Ugrondar set sender to
	mark@grondar.org using -f
Received: from grondar.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])i1TFkZ0w070591
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Sun, 29 Feb 2004 15:46:36 GMT
	(envelope-from mark@grondar.org)
From: Mark Murray <mark@grondar.org>
Message-Id: <200402291546.i1TFkZ0w070591@grimreaper.grondar.org>
To: current@freebsd.org
Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 15:46:35 +0000
Sender: mark@grondar.org
X-Spam-Score: 4 (****) FROM_NO_LOWER,MSGID_FROM_MTA_SHORT
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.39
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 01 Mar 2004 05:01:12 -0800
Subject: NULL vs 0 vs 0L bikeshed time
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 15:50:20 -0000

Hi

1) Please restrain the need to bikeshed this one to death. I am
   sympathetic to technical arguments, but compulsive noise over
   such issues is annoying.

2) Please separate style disussion from technical discussion.

I'd like to commit the following patch. It makes sure that for C
and the kernel, NULL is a ((void *)0), and for C++, NULL is either
(0L) or 0, with __LP64__ used to define the difference.

The intent is to catch use of NULL where 0 or (0L) should be used.
It generates extra warnings (I promise to fix these).

Comments?

WARNING! Cut+Paste munging!

Index: _null.h
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys/sys/_null.h,v
retrieving revision 1.5
diff -u -d -r1.5 _null.h
diff -u -d -r1.5 _null.h
--- _null.h     26 Dec 2003 06:11:43 -0000      1.5
+++ _null.h     26 Dec 2003 10:36:52 -0000
@@ -28,14 +28,14 @@

 #ifndef NULL

-#ifdef _KERNEL
-#define        NULL    (void *)0
+#if defined(_KERNEL) || !defined(__cplusplus)
+#define        NULL    ((void *)0)
 #else
 #if defined(__LP64__)
-#define        NULL    0L
+#define        NULL    (0L)
 #else
 #define        NULL    0
-#endif
-#endif /* _KERNEL */
+#endif /* __LP64__ */
+#endif /* _KERNEL || !__cplusplus */

 #endif

M
--
Mark Murray
iumop ap!sdn w,I idlaH