On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 2:02 PM, David Blaikie <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 1:49 PM, Nico Weber <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> the attached patch fixes both issues mentioned in >> http://llvm.org/PR12146 . Like suggested by Eli in that bug, it does >> this by defining NULL to 0 instead of __null on windows. I think it >> would be nice to have a __clang_null, but this patch fixes the >> immediate issues I'm seeing without me having to argue with Eli :-) >> Maybe I'll do that in a follow-up patch. > > I'm probably with you on the __clang_null - ish, but if "better > diagnostics"* isn't something Eli considers a "necessary" basis for > making that change, I guess not. > > * Currently our null-conversion warnings are off by default & not very > good (big holes in them - int i = NULL doesn't warn when sizeof(void*) > == sizeof(int)). Also, technically we could implement these warnings > without __null anyway, by looking at the spelling of every zero > literal in a program... but perhaps that would be prohibitive. > >> Ok? > > Could you potentially test both these cases in the same source file? > Just to keep test file count down.
No, because stddef.h has file include guards. Nico _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
