7 Sep
2012
7 Sep
'12
5:50 p.m.
AMDG On 09/07/2012 10:35 AM, Chris Cleeland wrote:
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 11:32 AM, James Mathiesen
wrote: This use case seems really common and I was surprised it gave me problems.
I assume that nullptr_t in C++11 fixes this but then I was wondering if the cases were basic and common enough it would make sense to have a BOOST_CHECK_NULL / BOOST_CHECK_NOT_NULL and the assorted variants.
Use "0" instead of NULL.
This won't help given that the cause of the problem is that NULL *is* 0. In Christ, Steven Watanabe