Re: nullptr vs 0

From: Emil Dotchevski (emildotchevski_at_[hidden])
Date: 2022-05-28 20:03:29

On Sat, May 21, 2022 at 5:59 PM 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.

Do we have an official Boost policy on "fixing" warnings? E.g. what sort of
warnings should or should not be fixed?