Re: Re[2]: [RFA]: BOOL coding standards (Was: Problem with +numberWithBool: ?)

[Leigh Smith]

> Hm, well, actually I do prefer "if (ptr == NULL)" over "if (!ptr)". 
> Not sure why.

Implicit is the assumption that NULL is always 0, which isn't actually 
a specification, merely a convention of the compiler that NULL is 
actually something like:

#define NULL (void *) 0

While unusual for a compiler to declare NULL to be something other than 
0, it would be legal C, depending on the processor architecture. I'd 
definitely favour the more explicit ptr == NULL since you are then 
articulating that you are checking against a NULL pointer, rather than 
doing an implicit cast to an integer before then inverting the implicit 
comparison against 0.
--
Leigh Smith
mailto:address@hidden
http://www.leighsmith.com