From owner-svn-src-head@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 2 09:03:11 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-head@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A4EF1065697; Thu, 2 Dec 2010 09:03:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brde@optusnet.com.au) Received: from mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au [211.29.132.186]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE1688FC15; Thu, 2 Dec 2010 09:03:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from c122-106-145-124.carlnfd1.nsw.optusnet.com.au (c122-106-145-124.carlnfd1.nsw.optusnet.com.au [122.106.145.124]) by mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id oB2936Fs002998 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 2 Dec 2010 20:03:08 +1100 Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 20:03:06 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans X-X-Sender: bde@besplex.bde.org To: Lawrence Stewart In-Reply-To: <4CF72434.8@freebsd.org> Message-ID: <20101202200155.R2170@besplex.bde.org> References: <201012020047.oB20lte1062102@svn.freebsd.org> <20101202141735.B1174@besplex.bde.org> <4CF72434.8@freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, Bruce Evans Subject: Re: svn commit: r216101 - head/sys/netinet X-BeenThere: svn-src-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the src tree for head/-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2010 09:03:11 -0000 On Thu, 2 Dec 2010, Lawrence Stewart wrote: > On 12/02/10 14:45, Bruce Evans wrote: >> On Thu, 2 Dec 2010, Lawrence Stewart wrote: >> >>> Log: >>> Pass NULL instead of 0 for the th pointer value. NULL != 0 on all >>> platforms. >> ... >> The last case is essentially what applies in function calls. Now the >> conversion of either NULL or 0 or any other null pointer constant to a >> null pointer is done according to the prototype. The results are not >> necessarily the same like I said above, but they compare the same. >> Thus spelling the null pointer constant as 0 made no difference to >> the higher-level results on any platform (unless you do something like >> memcmp of null pointers, and use an exotic platform where null pointers >> have different representations). It was just a style bug. > > hmm, thanks for the informative response. I'm not sure where I got it in > my head that NULL != 0 on all platforms, but you've now corrected that > bit of misunderstanding. For the record, the now known to be bogus > commit log was my own creation based on my (mis)understanding and did > not come from David. > > When it comes time to MFC, should I use the bogus log message or correct > it to something like: > > "Fix a minor style nit by passing NULL instead of 0 for the th pointer > value." Thanks. Bruce