Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: question about nullptr
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2024 00:59:19 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <87y166jh60.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <v6bavg$3pu5i$1@dont-email.me> <20240706054641.175@kylheku.com>
	<v6bfi1$3qn4u$1@dont-email.me> <l9ciO.7$cr5e.2@fx05.iad>
	<877cdyuq0f.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <2ckiO.19403$7Ej.4487@fx46.iad>
	<87plrpt4du.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <9bCiO.7108$sXW9.3805@fx41.iad>
	<87jzhwu5v9.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <20240708001722.280@kylheku.com>
	<v6gab6$qdd2$1@dont-email.me> <878qyctcdt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
	<v6gf23$r5pf$1@dont-email.me> <8734ojua2s.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
	<v6h9su$vkip$1@dont-email.me> <87sewjsdc5.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
	<v6m9bn$1vbsi$1@dont-email.me> <87cynkommh.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
	<v6r6c7$3122q$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Injection-Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2024 01:59:19 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="4e5d3404761aff5fd06f2da3e1d5fb25";
	logging-data="3413147"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+8eIKc2GEHQ6DXdlh4NCTzp30yEgpgkkY="
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:RptAtTWFUUvG4+G6mrRaUp9+7SE=
	sha1:Y9uFewUJi6/XOByFBkSnhYHEXxk=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.b82f589a8d327362575d.20240713005919BST.87y166jh60.fsf@bsb.me.uk
Bytes: 3310

Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> writes:

> On 11.07.2024 01:25, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>> Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> writes:
>>> [...]
>>> Compare it to 'enum' constants. When I code or debug I want to track
>>> (search and find) them by name not by integer number.
>>> Similar with the 'enum' bool type we introduced (when there was not
>>> yet a bool type existing in C or C++) with literal constants 'true'
>>> and 'false'. (Only two values, but still as important.)
>>> Similar with the dedicated pointer value 0 (these days we used the
>>> literal 'null'). (Only one value, still useful for tracking eq/ne
>>> comparisons and initializations.)
>> 
>> Yes, you've said that before.  You want to search for nullptr.  I can't
>> think of how that might help find a real bug, if that's what you mean by
>> bug-tracking.
>> 
>> I was hoping for a story... "Once I had this bug where... and if I'd
>> been using nullptr I'd have found it a day earlier" kind of thing.  I'd
>> found a lot of bugs over the years, but I don't recall any that would
>> have been easier to find had I been able to search for nullptr.
>> 
>> I was looking for real-world insight here.  Obviously one could make up
>> a bug where p = nullptr; was written where, say, p = null - ptr; was
>> intended, but that's not what I mean.
>> 
>> Without such an example, your argument seems to be overly generic.
>
> That's why I had problems to "explain" the reasons to you; because
> it's so universal a property, so obvious (as I said), that I don't
> know what else I could say.

Yes, that's been the clear for a while now.  That's why, when you said
you could not say more, I was happy to leave it at that (my "ok").

-- 
Ben.