Re: nullptr vs 0

From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2022-05-22 10:35:04

On May 22, 2022 3:59:33 AM Peter Dimov via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]> 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.