Re: [PATCH] Use NULL instead of integer 0 in security/selinux/

From: Andrea Arcangeli (andrea_at_suse.de)
Date: 07/10/04

  • Next message: raven_at_themaw.net: "Re: umount() and NFS races in 2.4.26"
    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/


  • Next message: raven_at_themaw.net: "Re: umount() and NFS races in 2.4.26"