Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2025 13:29:52 -0400
On Thu, Jul 31, 2025 at 1:15 PM zxuiji <gb2985_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> nullptr MUST hold a value, not matter if that value is valid or not, therefore it will ALWAYS have pointer arithmetic available. It is utter insanity to say a pointer might not have pointer arithmetic.
I'm not sure I see the point of you repeating the same thing over and
over as if it's going to magically manifest a different result. It is
undefined behavior. You can complain about it, but that won't change
what it is.
Things aren't UB because they have a value. They're UB because the
standard says so. You can consider it "utter insanity" if that makes
you feel better. But the standard says it's UB, so that is the reality
that you have to engage with.
And no, it's not going to be changed for this trivial feature you want.
>
> nullptr MUST hold a value, not matter if that value is valid or not, therefore it will ALWAYS have pointer arithmetic available. It is utter insanity to say a pointer might not have pointer arithmetic.
I'm not sure I see the point of you repeating the same thing over and
over as if it's going to magically manifest a different result. It is
undefined behavior. You can complain about it, but that won't change
what it is.
Things aren't UB because they have a value. They're UB because the
standard says so. You can consider it "utter insanity" if that makes
you feel better. But the standard says it's UB, so that is the reality
that you have to engage with.
And no, it's not going to be changed for this trivial feature you want.
Received on 2025-07-31 17:30:06