[Development] RFF: nullptr rules
Thiago Macieira
thiago.macieira at intel.com
Thu Dec 10 19:35:42 CET 2015
On Thursday 10 December 2015 16:24:02 Sergio Martins wrote:
> > But I don't think we should mandate use of nullptr everywhere. Where it's
> > unambiguous, it doesn't add value.
>
> bool foo = 0;
>
> This is unambiguous, just like your "const char *ptr = 0" example, so "=
> false" wouldn't add value ?
Strictly and technically speaking, that is true.
Current coding practice is that we don't do it. I am willing to accept that
using nullptr improves readability and people should use it if they want to.
But I don't want -1s going on because someone's muscle memory used a 0 instead
of nullptr.
More importantly, I don't want a massive code change, because it will not
catch everything and it will cause unnecessary churn and merge conflicts.
Clang-modernize requires inspecting all platforms and that will not happen.
--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
More information about the Development
mailing list