[RFC] Using KPassivePopup from KSystrayIcon

[Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.]

On Wednesday 04 April 2007 08:40:54 Lubos Lunak wrote:
> On Wednesday 04 of April 2007, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> > On Wednesday 04 April 2007, Hans Meine <hans_meine at gmx.net> wrote
> > about 'Re: [RFC] Using KPassivePopup from KSystrayIcon':
> > > Am Dienstag, 03. April 2007 23:48:19 schrieb Matthew Woehlke:
> > > > > start using NULL
> > > > Hmm... interesting. [1] says NULL is okay, but [2] says it isn't.
> > > > Which is right?
> > > >
> > > > [1] http://developer.kde.org/documentation/other/mistakes.html
> > > > [2] http://pim.kde.org/development/coding-korganizer.php
> > >
> > > I liked using NULL (in order to be unambiguous) until I was told that
> > > it is not portable.  NULL is not always defined to be "just zero", 
but
> > > it may be (void *)0.
>
>  Not true.

I've already heard the "NULL is not portable rumor" be never experienced 
any 
issues, so that may very well be untrue.

However, it is absolutely true that non-standard compliers may define NULL 
as 
something other than 0.  For example, g++ defines NULL to be something 
other 
than 0.  (Although, it's probably even better than 0).

> > Stroustrup uses 0:
> > http://www.research.att.com/~bs/bs_faq2.html#null
> >
> > The standard says they are the same (after preprocessing).
>
>  Not true.

Hrm, I'll take Stroustrap's word (linked from my mail) instead of yours and 
assume standard NULL is defined to be 0, at least until I get a chance to 
view the actual standard.  Or, am I behind the times and C++0x is actually 
the standard now and not just a work in progress AND is has a new define 
for 
NULL.

>  http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-devel&m=115090731411534&w=2 - I don't
> feel like repeating myself yet once more.

That mail recommends the use of NULL and links to a blog post that's even 
shorter than the email.  The document linked from the blog post demands the 
use of 0, but doesn't really support that position other than saying NULL 
is 
C-style not C++-style (It's also document [2] above).  The document linked 
from the comments is a proposal for C++0x; but, I don't know if it actually 
because part of that work without material changes.  Also, I didn't think 
C++0x had become the standard yet.

Could someone in charge throw up a document on techbase that we can treat 
as 
canonical?  Or, should the developer.kde.org document ([1] above) be 
treated 
as canonical and any of 0, 0L, or NULL be acceptable across all KDE code?

-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.                     ,= ,-_-. =. 
bss03 at volumehost.net                      ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy           `-'(. .)`-' 
http://iguanasuicide.org/                      \_/     
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20070405/0f9a849e/attachment.sig>