On Thu, Jun 23, 2005 at 03:48:39PM -0700, Bill Studenmund wrote:
> I agree actually DOING (well, trying to do) something 
> with a NULL pointer should go boom.

Printing the string content pointed to by the NULL pointer is not "trying to
do something"? I realy don't understand this differentation, sorry.

> If we really are ok with it (as evidenced by the fact we
> changed man pages and code), then we shouldn't forbid it in the style
> guide.

Well, in the man pages I have it is not documented, and since this
discussion did not reach consensus I'm not sure we realy are ok with it.

> The reason why I object to such a change is that I've worked with code
> that has strong-NULL-protection around printf(). I've written it. I've had
> to maintain it. And it was irritating.

You have to be carefull about null pointer for every pointer operation. I do
not see the difference for printf.

Martin