Re: [PATCH] Use NULL instead of integer 0 in security/selinux/
From: Andrea Arcangeli (andrea_at_suse.de)
Date: 07/10/04
- Previous message: carbonated beverage: "bk pull from bkbits screwy?"
- In reply to: P. Benie: "Re: [PATCH] Use NULL instead of integer 0 in security/selinux/"
- Next in thread: Andrea Arcangeli: "Re: [PATCH] Use NULL instead of integer 0 in security/selinux/"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Sat, 10 Jul 2004 09:02:55 +0200 To: "P. Benie" <pjb1008@eng.cam.ac.uk>
On Thu, Jul 08, 2004 at 12:43:16PM +0100, P. Benie wrote:
> the integer 0 and null pointers are not the same, the compiler will
> perform the appropriate conversion for you, so it is always correct to
> define NULL as (void *)0.
exactly, the compiler knows about that.
> Personally, I always use 0 and NULL for integers and null pointers
> respectively, but that's because of long estalished conventions that make
> the code readabile, rather than anything to do with validity of the code.
Yep.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Previous message: carbonated beverage: "bk pull from bkbits screwy?"
- In reply to: P. Benie: "Re: [PATCH] Use NULL instead of integer 0 in security/selinux/"
- Next in thread: Andrea Arcangeli: "Re: [PATCH] Use NULL instead of integer 0 in security/selinux/"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
