Re: [Sdcc-user] _Optional

[Philipp K. K. <pk...@sp...>]

Am 05.03.25 um 13:26 schrieb Maarten Brock:
> Is there also a counterpart like _Required or _NonNull to indicate that the
> pointer must already be checked to be non-null? It would have to be used in
> the prototype of course. It could climb up the calling tree to a point
> where the check is performed only once.

N3422, which proposes _Optional, also discusses why they think that
_Optional is better than _Nullable and _Nonnull (clang, but not GCC has
the latter two two).

Philipp