From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ppp: don't use 0 in pointer context
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 09:44:48 +1100
Message-ID: <17386.29792.87133.852682@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com>
References: <20060208222559.GA14543@mipter.zuzino.mipt.ru>
	<17386.27957.822041.83512@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk>, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-ppp@vger.kernel.org
Return-path: <linux-ppp-owner@vger.kernel.org>
To: James Carlson <carlsonj@workingcode.com>
In-Reply-To: <17386.27957.822041.83512@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
Sender: linux-ppp-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org

James Carlson writes:

> Alexey Dobriyan writes:
> > -	if (ap == 0)
> > +	if (!ap)
> 
> And the solution is to treat it as a boolean instead?!  I'm not sure
> which is more ugly.
> 
> Why wouldn't explicit comparison against NULL be the preferred fix?

I just think this whole "you shouldn't compare a pointer to 0" thing
is completely silly, and patches like this have about the same level
of usefulness as patches that change "color" to "colour" or vice
versa.

However, the head penguin seems to have some bee in his bonnet about 0
not being a pointer value (despite what the C standard says), so
whatever.  *shrug*

Paul.