rspec/rules/S2815/comments-and-links.adoc

=== on 8 Apr 2015, 17:03:24 Evgeny Mandrikov wrote:
\[~ann.campbell.2] in {cpp} compared to Java, notion of "null" exists in a bit different form(s) - see \http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/types/NULL

So actually wonder - whether we should use term (styled as code) "null", or "nullptr" or "0"? WDYT?

=== on 8 Apr 2015, 19:10:45 Ann Campbell wrote:
I've removed the code formatting on "null" but don't want to use 0 instead here because \"``++this++`` can never be 0" doesn't read as smoothly (i.e. takes a little more thought to understand IMO) than \"``++this++`` can never be null".

=== on 28 May 2015, 12:22:38 Evgeny Mandrikov wrote:
\[~ann.campbell.2] I changed title and message according to your last comment, added literal "nullptr" into description and did simplification of examples. Could you please check?

=== on 29 May 2015, 12:34:58 Ann Campbell wrote:
looks good [~evgeny.mandrikov]