From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17343 invoked by alias); 23 Apr 2009 23:35:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 17334 invoked by uid 22791); 23 Apr 2009 23:35:48 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_FAIL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx20.gnu.org (HELO mx20.gnu.org) (199.232.41.8) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 23 Apr 2009 23:35:44 +0000 Received: from mail.codesourcery.com ([65.74.133.4]) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Lx8SD-0003yD-Kz for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Thu, 23 Apr 2009 19:35:41 -0400 Received: (qmail 19121 invoked from network); 23 Apr 2009 23:35:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.0.2?) (mitchell@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 23 Apr 2009 23:35:40 -0000 Message-ID: <49F0FB46.8020202@codesourcery.com> Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 23:46:00 -0000 From: Mark Mitchell User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dave Korn CC: Jason Merrill , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Manuel_L=F3pez-Ib=E1?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=F1ez?= , Gcc Patch List , Nathan Sidwell , Janis Johnson Subject: Re: [C/C++] PR 13358 long long and C++ do not mix well References: <6c33472e0808281543w5d464fe6r1fa5e584797ac46c@mail.gmail.com> <6c33472e0808281700m457e1f2euf6a0da108dd5b84a@mail.gmail.com> <6c33472e0810221705u1286ac46g166ec57677fe0f4c@mail.gmail.com> <6c33472e0904101212j69a8aa48hb12369c0aeb55242@mail.gmail.com> <6c33472e0904190416g1bff083j5a2a6e73640364f7@mail.gmail.com> <49EBED41.6070609@codesourcery.com> <6c33472e0904200138n73a3a3c6l779fc89d0fcff39f@mail.gmail.com> <49EC9148.9070806@codesourcery.com> <6c33472e0904200917q221b7e76hd4aeedfe164b8f4e@mail.gmail.com> <49ECA229.4020208@codesourcery.com> <49ECB286.3010309@redhat.com> <49F03209.3080907@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <49F03209.3080907@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2009-04/txt/msg01883.txt.bz2 Dave Korn wrote: > /tmp/string-null-ctor.C:9: warning: null argument where non-null required > (argument 1) > > Would either of you care to comment on what would be a suitable pattern to test? I'd just say "null". Or maybe "null pointer" (see below). As a nit-pick on the message, and without having much context, I suggest something like warning: argument is the null pointer That's because (a) I like using terms of the standard, and "the null pointer" is a term from the standard, where as just plain "null" isn't, (b) once you point out it's null, I don't think you add much by saying that what you want is something non-null. As for the test question, to me "null" is the key word here. Any good warning message for this situation will say "null", and any message that's talking about "null" is probably saying something useful. My two cents, -- Mark Mitchell CodeSourcery mark@codesourcery.com (650) 331-3385 x713