Mark Dickinson added the comment: > If on some platform (uintptr_t)NULL != 0, then some other address can be > reflected to 0.
This doesn't seem very likely, since then the C implementation wouldn't roundtrip when converting that other pointer to an integer and back to a pointer. (C99 6.3.2.3 says that (void *)0 is a null pointer constant.) The code you removed is not undefined behaviour, and is not just an optimization---removing it would change the semantics of PyLong_FromVoidPtr. There may be code that depends on PyLong_FromVoidPtr(NULL) being 0. I believe the code should stay. > What about (Py_uintptr_t)p - (Py_uintptr_t)(void *)NULL? What about it? What's the relevance to this issue? ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue16277> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
