On Tue, Jul 05, 2022 at 09:21:54PM -0500, Paul Eggert wrote:
> A couple of things. First, this doesn't seem to be glibc patch; it seems to
> be a reverse patch.
>
> Second, these days, why not just initialize to a null pointer all the time?
I think there's some confusion here. My patch is intended
On 7/5/22 21:01, Guilherme Janczak wrote:
I intend to send this file to glibc to make gnulib and glibc source the
same.
A couple of things. First, this doesn't seem to be glibc patch; it seems
to be a reverse patch.
Second, these days, why not just initialize to a null pointer all the
time?
On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 12:02:23AM +0200, Bruno Haible wrote:
> Since you are apparently speculating on a new compiler, please tell
> starting which version of GCC one can assume that (on ELF platforms)
>const char *x = NULL;
> produce code that is as good as
>const char *x;
My intention t
