undefined | Better HN

0 pointsjjnoakes9y ago0 comments

> When you pass it to execlp, it just gets pushed through as a bit-pattern

No, it doesn't. It goes through a proper conversion to a pointer.

> [passing nullptr and getting 0 out of va_arg is] not required behaviour by the standard

Yes, it is. See C++11 and C++14 standards, section 5.2.2 paragraph 7.

You've been all over this thread shouting at people about how wrong they were, and even in your correction you are still mistaken. Please try to refrain from that in the future; lots of people reading these threads are going to be very confused about what is technically correct here, and I'm not willing to go reply to all of them.

Perhaps some edits and/or deletes are appropriate?

0 comments

3 comments · 1 top-level

CJefferson9y ago· 2 in thread

You are right, I learnt this stuff in a C++0x draft, and it has been notably improved. I'm not discussing C++ minutiae in future, I've learnt my lesson.

Ycombinator allows neither edits or deletions after a short amount of time it seems.

jjnoakesOP9y ago

> I learnt this stuff in a C++0x draft, and it has been notably improved.

I guess the lesson is: don't yell at people if you aren't up-to-date on what you are yelling about :)

CJefferson9y ago

Yes, yes, I agree.

In my defence, I thought I was up to date. I did know all about how C++ and varargs interact, I was just unaware there was a specific addition to varargs just for nullptr, and I'll be honest it didn't even occur to me to check!

While I agree it's a sensible feature, it's also (for me) been the final straw on giving up on understanding C++ (not using, but understanding...)

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse