Florian Weimer <fwei...@redhat.com> writes:
> Would you be able to check whether __null is in the preprocessed
> sources? If it is there (and the lack of further logged expansions
> suggests this), then this is a compiler bug. __null is not zero, and
> should be fine to use as a null pointer constant. This is why NULL is
> not defined as 0.
I can reproduce this without any preprocessing with clang 9, 10, and 11.
% cat foo.cc
int foo(char* msg_ctxt_id)
{
return msg_ctxt_id == __null;
}
% clang++-11 -Wzero-as-null-pointer-constant -c foo.cc
foo.cc:3:25: warning: zero as null pointer constant
[-Wzero-as-null-pointer-constant]
return msg_ctxt_id == __null;
^~~~~~
nullptr
1 warning generated.
% clang++-10 -Wzero-as-null-pointer-constant -c foo.cc
foo.cc:3:25: warning: zero as null pointer constant
[-Wzero-as-null-pointer-constant]
return msg_ctxt_id == __null;
^~~~~~
nullptr
1 warning generated.
% clang++-9 -Wzero-as-null-pointer-constant -c foo.cc
foo.cc:3:25: warning: zero as null pointer constant
[-Wzero-as-null-pointer-constant]
return msg_ctxt_id == __null;
^~~~~~
nullptr
1 warning generated.
--
Alexandre Duret-Lutz
