On Fri, 14 Nov 2014, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > > I don't think that the change is desirable in all cases. There are > > functions like kmalloc where NULL means failure and !p seems like the > > reasonable choice. But there maybe other cases where NULL is somehow > > a meaningful value. > > How do you think about to adjust checks for null pointers not only > in Linux source files but also in other applications? > Are there any more software design challenges to consider with the > definition of the preprocessor symbol "NULL"?
Other applications may have other preferences. julia _______________________________________________ Cocci mailing list [email protected] https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
