On Wednesday 09 December 2015 22:47:51 Marc Mutz wrote: > > const char *ptr = 0; > > What we agreed on was for Q_NULLPTR. > > Some developers back then were complaining that the *macro* is ugly, and > that by 5.7, we would be able to use the real thing and didn't want the > double conversion 0 -> Q_NULLPTR -> nullptr. > > The agreement back then also was not to rely on the disambiguating features > of nullptr, because Q_NULLPTR might be 0. > > Now we can use the real thing. With real nullptr semantics.
True. I'd like to propose this: a) no massive replacement or clang-modernize, for the reasons Richard pointed out b) which means existing zeroes continue in sources and private headers c) which means no -Werror=zero-as-nullptr outside of headersclean New code should use nullptr where it improves readability. Changes to existing code can update to use nullptr. But I don't think we should mandate use of nullptr everywhere. Where it's unambiguous, it doesn't add value. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
