[Development] RFF: nullptr rules

Joerg Bornemann joerg.bornemann at theqtcompany.com
Thu Dec 10 15:38:15 CET 2015

On 10-Dec-15 15:25, Bubke Marco wrote:

> I think it less a technical issue. To me it looked very perlish
> to use zero to mark a defined invalid pointer but C++ is full of this expert
> language hacks.

You still will need this thourough expert knowledge if you encounter a 
crash and the backtrace/debugger tells you that memory near address 
0x00000000 has been accessed. There is no fancy popup that yells 
"invalid pointer" at you. Also, for some reason it was decided to call 
the keyword nullptr. If that's not a hint for the inexperienced 
developer / leakage of implementation details...

> I think it is more a social issue because Qt can look to old fashion.
> New people who discover Qt maybe get the same feeling as I got in
> nineties as I looked at Motif.


> So I think the question should be how much harm is produced
> by this policy? I don't see any except people have to change their
> habits.

How much harm is produced by forbidding do while loops?
How much harm is done by changing every Foo<Bar<Bla> > to Foo<Bar<Bla>>?



More information about the Development mailing list