Re: [Cocci] spatch for trivial pointer comparison style?

[Julia Lawall]

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
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/