On Donnerstag, 10. Dezember 2015 14:36:49 CET Marc Mutz wrote: <snip>
> As for why we need to have rules for nullptr: It's a funny you should ask,
> because you're contributing to a project that mandates the placement of {}s
> in minute detail. It's unclear why there should be no guideline for 0 vs.
> nullptr if there is for for() vs. for ().
>
> The rationale, in both cases, of course, is: consistency.
This, for me, is btw. a very strong argument in favor of requesting nullptr
everywhere.
Personally, I'd be in favor of running clang-modernize on Qt and asking people
to use nullptr in new code.
Reviewing the patch of clang-modernize is easy btw. It either compiles and is
good, or it doesn't and needs work. None of this needs manual review.
--
Milian Wolff | [email protected] | Software Engineer
KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH&Co KG, a KDAB Group company
Tel: +49-30-521325470
KDAB - The Qt Experts
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
