34605 2010-02-04 10:57:17 -0800 check-webkit-style incorrectly complains about NULL appearing in a comment 2010-07-20 00:17:42 -0700 1 1 1 Unclassified WebKit Tools / Tests 528+ (Nightly build) PC Linux RESOLVED INVALID P2 Normal --- 1 gustavo webkit-unassigned ap levin oldest_to_newest 187864 0 gustavo 2010-02-04 10:57:17 -0800 See https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34602 check-webkit-style reported this: Failed to run "WebKitTools/Scripts/check-webkit-style" exit_code: 1 WebCore/platform/network/soup/DNSSoup.cpp:41: Use 0 instead of NULL. [readability/null] [4] Total errors found: 1 And this is the line it's complaining about:  41 // We may get invalid hostnames, so NULL-check here. 253573 1 levin 2010-07-19 23:30:47 -0700 (In reply to comment #0) > See https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34602 > > check-webkit-style reported this: > > Failed to run "WebKitTools/Scripts/check-webkit-style" exit_code: 1 > WebCore/platform/network/soup/DNSSoup.cpp:41: Use 0 instead of NULL. > [readability/null] [4] > Total errors found: 1 > > And this is the line it's complaining about: > >  41 // We may get invalid hostnames, so NULL-check here. fwiw, this check was done this way on purpose. The check was carefully done to include both code and comments but not items in quotes (in code). Several experienced reviews have commented on NULL appearing in comments. As I understand it, the reason being that NULL isn't allowed in code so it doesn't make sense in comments. For example, the comment could easily have said // Check for invalid hostnames. and seems to talk more about why than what (checking for a 0 value). Another recent instance is this comment if (hdc) { // Can this ever actually be NULL? which could have easily been if (hdc) { // Can hdc ever actually be 0? 253583 2 ap 2010-07-20 00:17:42 -0700 Yes, I agree that this particular comment needn't mention null check at all. And we do prefer to talk about null or 0 when necessary.