Re: NULL with xlc

[Paul Eggert]

On 11/14/24 11:51, Bruno Haible wrote:
> I would mess with it only when a configure test detects that it expands to a
> non-pointer. That is, when a conditional expression
>      (foo ? "x" : NULL)
> sollicits a compilation error. This catches exactly the AIX case.

I don't see how it catches the AIX xlc case. That's a compiler bug, and 
it doesn't matter whether NULL expands to 0 or to ((void *) 0), the 
compiler bug will be present either way. In contrast, the fix you 
installed works around the compiler bug, so let's stick with that.


> In the other thread, that started yesterday, Alejandro pointed to the
> history of 'nullptr' in C [1]. Also, my evaluation from last year [2]
> still stands: The general habit in the community is to use NULL. I have
> only seen 1 C package that consistently uses nullptr.
>
> Bruno
>
> [1] https://software.codidact.com/posts/292718/292759#answer-292759

I wasn't following the other thread. In that case I withdraw my 
suggestion to use nullptr.