[Nfd-dev] code style rule 3.20

[Alex Afanasyev]

Ok. I misunderstood.  Yes, for the new code it makes more sense to use nullptr

—--
Alex

> On Oct 30, 2014, at 3:00 PM, Junxiao Shi <shijunxiao at email.arizona.edu> wrote:
> 
> Hi Alex
> 
> I'm not saying 0 is forbidden.
> 
> My suggestion is: any new code should use nullptr to represent null pointer, instead of 0 or NULL.
> 
> Yours, Junxiao
> 
> On Oct 30, 2014 2:57 PM, "Alex Afanasyev" <alexander.afanasyev at ucla.edu <mailto:alexander.afanasyev at ucla.edu>> wrote:
> Given the amount of code we have, I would suggest we keep both notations as allowed.
> 
>> On Oct 30, 2014, at 2:49 PM, Junxiao Shi <shijunxiao at email.arizona.edu <mailto:shijunxiao at email.arizona.edu>> wrote:
>> 
>> Dear folks
>> 
>> rule 3.20 states: 0 should be used instead of NULL.
>> 
>> In C++ 11, a null pointer is typically written as std::nullptr.
>> Usage of std::nullptr is already permitted, because it doesn't violate this rule.
>> 
>> Should we amend this rule as follows?
>> "std::nullptr" should be used to represent null pointer.
>> 
>> Yours, Junxiao
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Nfd-dev mailing list
>> Nfd-dev at lists.cs.ucla.edu <mailto:Nfd-dev at lists.cs.ucla.edu>
>> http://www.lists.cs.ucla.edu/mailman/listinfo/nfd-dev <http://www.lists.cs.ucla.edu/mailman/listinfo/nfd-dev>
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.lists.cs.ucla.edu/pipermail/nfd-dev/attachments/20141030/db20477f/attachment.html>