This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [rfa/cli] s/NO_FUNCTION/NULL/
- From: Fernando Nasser <fnasser at redhat dot com>
- To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at is dot elta dot co dot il>
- Cc: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at cygnus dot com>, gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 11:50:48 -0500
- Subject: Re: [rfa/cli] s/NO_FUNCTION/NULL/
- Organization: Red Hat Canada
- References: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1020121114951.16755I-100000@is>
Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>
> On Sun, 20 Jan 2002, Andrew Cagney wrote:
>
> > Do you have any problems with the below?
> >
> > Andrew
> >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > The attached replaces the NO_FUNCTION macro with NULL. If you
> > > examine the code, function.cfunc() is only sometimes assigned the
> > > value NO_FUNCTION and no code actually tests for a value of
> > > NO_FUNCTION. Consequently, I can't see any point in having this
> > > macro.
>
> IMHO, someone should test this change with the latest versions of GCC,
> including their development line: they could have their own ideas when
> you are allowed to pass NULL, especially with all the warning options
> we use.
Besides, the NO_FUNCTION documents the meaning better than NULL
(although most people should guess). Maybe you can add a comment
somewhere nearby.
Any chance Eli's concerns become true and we get a warning because
NULL is not typed properly? Maybe you would need a cast (in which
case I would prefer the NO_FUNCTION def.
Regards,
Fernando
--
Fernando Nasser
Red Hat Canada Ltd. E-Mail: fnasser@redhat.com
2323 Yonge Street, Suite #300
Toronto, Ontario M4P 2C9