From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Mar 1 14:47:26 2004 Return-Path: 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 1BB3A16A4CE; Mon, 1 Mar 2004 14:47:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from laika.ifs.tuwien.ac.at (laika.ifs.tuwien.ac.at [128.131.167.43]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA51C43D2D; Mon, 1 Mar 2004 14:47:25 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from stefan@fafoe.narf.at) Received: from fafoe.narf.at (unknown [212.186.3.235]) by laika.ifs.tuwien.ac.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5097320B0; Mon, 1 Mar 2004 23:49:39 +0100 (CET) Received: from wombat.fafoe.narf.at (wombat.fafoe.narf.at [192.168.1.42]) by fafoe.narf.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2E6F40B8; Mon, 1 Mar 2004 23:47:21 +0100 (CET) Received: by wombat.fafoe.narf.at (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 3999332A; Mon, 1 Mar 2004 23:47:19 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 23:47:19 +0100 From: Stefan Farfeleder To: Mark Murray Message-ID: <20040301224712.GB959@wombat.fafoe.narf.at> Mail-Followup-To: Mark Murray , current@freebsd.org References: <20040301213454.GA959@wombat.fafoe.narf.at> <200403012158.i21LwS0w084961@grimreaper.grondar.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200403012158.i21LwS0w084961@grimreaper.grondar.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2004 22:47:26 -0000 On Mon, Mar 01, 2004 at 09:58:28PM +0000, Mark Murray wrote: > Stefan Farfeleder writes: > > On Sun, Feb 29, 2004 at 03:46:35PM +0000, Mark Murray wrote: > > > > > -#define NULL 0L > > > +#define NULL (0L) > > > > What's the point of parenthesizing 0L? > > Its two lexical elements. I got into the habit of doing that when a > macro replacement bit me some years ago. It is a very unimportant part > of the patch. :-) While I agree that it's quite unimportant, I have to contradict you. `OL' is a pp-number which is converted to an integer-constant in translation phase 7 according to the C standard. It always is a single token. Cheers, Stefan