On 10-Dec-15 14:36, Marc Mutz wrote:
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.
The consequence of this argument is that we need a rule for every language feature for consistency. Please, no.
I was arguing that the unconditional enforcement of nullptr is solving a non-issue.
BR, Joerg _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
