@@ -135,7 +135,7 @@ _obstack_begin_worker (struct obstack *h,
h->next_free = h->object_base = __PTR_ALIGN ((char *) chunk, chunk->contents,
alignment - 1);
h->chunk_limit = chunk->limit = (char *) chunk + h->chunk_size;
- chunk->prev = 0;
+ chunk->prev = NULL;
/* The initial chunk now contains no empty object. */
h->maybe_empty_object = 0;
h->alloc_failed = 0;
@@ -178,7 +178,7 @@ void
_obstack_newchunk (struct obstack *h, _OBSTACK_SIZE_T length)
{
struct _obstack_chunk *old_chunk = h->chunk;
- struct _obstack_chunk *new_chunk = 0;
+ struct _obstack_chunk *new_chunk = NULL;
size_t obj_size = h->next_free - h->object_base;
char *object_base;
@@ -243,12 +243,12 @@ _obstack_allocated_p (struct obstack *h, void *obj)
/* We use >= rather than > since the object cannot be exactly at
the beginning of the chunk but might be an empty object exactly
at the end of an adjacent chunk. */
- while (lp != 0 && ((void *) lp >= obj || (void *) (lp)->limit < obj))
+ while (lp != NULL && ((void *) lp >= obj || (void *) (lp)->limit < obj))
{
plp = lp->prev;
lp = plp;
}
- return lp != 0;
+ return lp != NULL;
}
/* Free objects in obstack H, including OBJ and everything allocate
@@ -264,7 +264,7 @@ _obstack_free (struct obstack *h, void *obj)
/* We use >= because there cannot be an object at the beginning of a chunk.
But there can be an empty object at that address
at the end of another chunk. */
- while (lp != 0 && ((void *) lp >= obj || (void *) (lp)->limit < obj))
+ while (lp != NULL && ((void *) lp >= obj || (void *) (lp)->limit < obj))
{
plp = lp->prev;
call_freefun (h, lp);
@@ -279,7 +279,7 @@ _obstack_free (struct obstack *h, void *obj)
h->chunk_limit = lp->limit;
h->chunk = lp;
}
- else if (obj != 0)
+ else if (obj != NULL)
/* obj is not in any of the chunks! */
abort ();
}
@@ -290,7 +290,7 @@ _obstack_memory_used (struct obstack *h)
struct _obstack_chunk *lp;
_OBSTACK_SIZE_T nbytes = 0;
- for (lp = h->chunk; lp != 0; lp = lp->prev)
+ for (lp = h->chunk; lp != NULL; lp = lp->prev)
{
nbytes += lp->limit - (char *) lp;
}
'compat/obstack.c' occasionally assigns/compares a plain 0 to a pointer, which triggers sparse warnings. Use NULL instead. This is basically a cherry-pick of 3254310863 (obstack.c: Fix some sparse warnings, 2011-09-11) on top of the just updated code from upstream. Signed-off-by: SZEDER Gábor <szeder.dev@gmail.com> --- compat/obstack.c | 14 +++++++------- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)