On 2016/12/13 1:23, Tom Lane wrote:
> Fix creative, but unportable, spelling of "ptr != NULL".
>
> Or at least I suppose that's what was really meant here. But even
> aside from the not-per-project-style use of "0" to mean "NULL",
> I doubt it's safe to assume that all valid pointers are > NULL.
> Per buildfarm member pademelon.
Oops, that was definitely unintentional. Thanks for fixing!
Thanks,
Amit