Warning: mysqli::__construct(): (HY000/1203): User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\includes\artfuncs.php on line 21
Failed to connect to MySQL: (1203) User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connectionsPath: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Ben Bacarisse Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: question about nullptr Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2024 11:18:54 +0100 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 43 Message-ID: <878qyctcdt.fsf@bsb.me.uk> References: <20240706054641.175@kylheku.com> <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> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2024 12:18:54 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f9b9b2152fe0e8376b284d605ac6478c"; logging-data="874710"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18WWFSgC3Q3doxvBQcF66+7li3Xs4rHqT4=" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cancel-Lock: sha1:ZDZPTgJEMqm2dnZvikOyyUrNJeo= sha1:Vi82mEVetxUd9h7/PeT4aYrkWsE= X-BSB-Auth: 1.4726bb15ad40d043147e.20240708111854BST.878qyctcdt.fsf@bsb.me.uk Bytes: 3140 Janis Papanagnou writes: > On 08.07.2024 09:19, Kaz Kylheku wrote: >> On 2024-07-07, Ben Bacarisse wrote: >>> I find myself completely out of step with many posters here about >>> "explicit code" should look like. I think >>> >>> char *p = 0; >>> >>> is explicit enough and, in fact, I consider it a plus point if someone >>> reading it goes "hey, what's going on here?" and ends up learning that 0 >>> is null pointer constant in C. >> >> And if that person is on the C or C++ langauge committee, that bit of >> learning could just prevent a superfluous non-invention like nullptr. > > What's superfluous to one is useful for others (e.g. for grep'ing > occurrences of a null-pointer value in source codes); This is been suggested twice now but I'm struggling to see why that is useful. I can see management wanting one to find all uses of a null pointer constant to check that they have all been replaced by the "safer" nullptr, but what's the value in searching for nullptr? > if it's not > defined in a standard it gets explicitly defined individually, and > then likely in different (non-uniform, non-standard) ways. > > To me it's more likely that because of that it had been deliberately > added to support such desires, That would be a sound suggestion if "such desires" could be explained. Until then, I suggest it is simply harmonisation with C++. C now has true and false, [[...]] attributes, typeof, __has_include and no doubt quite a few more I've forgotten. nullptr is, until some other argument can be made, just another one of those. > and less likely that the C-standards > folks need to learn "C" and wouldn't know what 0 as a pointer value > would mean or that it has a clear semantic in such pointer contexts. -- Ben.