Re: [Boost-users] null_ptr?

From: Jonathan Franklin (franklin.jonathan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-01-02 20:19:42

On Jan 2, 2008 5:40 PM, Victor A. Wagner Jr. <vawjr_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> I personally like the   (foo) and (!foo) notation and think "needing" a
> "NULL" is pointless given the other holes in the language
>

I agree.

Though not "needed", I do think that the nullptr (or whatever is approved by
the committee) syntax will improve readability in cases where you need to
pass a null pointer value to a function (and you're too lazy to look up the
signature).  Using 0 in this case does make it slightly easier to confuse
the arguments.

However I will always use the "boolean style" tests as I find them more
intuitive (not to mention more compact syntactically).

Jon