Re: [boost] nullptr vs 0

Andrey Semashev wrote:

On May 22, 2022 3:59:33 AM Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:

...

Compilers apparently are warning on the use of 0 as a null pointer constant, suggesting we use nullptr instead. But compilers don't know that we support C++03 where nullptr isn't a thing.

Case in point: https://github.com/boostorg/throw_exception/pull/22

ifdef-ing every use of nullptr is unwieldy, so maybe we need BOOST_NULLPTR added to Boost.Config? That would expand to nullptr when it's supported, and 0 otherwise.

I'd replace 0 with NULL. If the compiler keeps complaining report a compiler bug and suppress the warning with a pragma.

No thanks. I did however not know that GCC doesn't warn on NULL. Interesting compromise, even though I don't quite see the point of it. Clang does warn on NULL, however.