Re: [PATCH] declarednull: rename DECLARED to NULL

[Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, Apr 10, 2021 at 2:58 PM Oliver Kiddle <opk@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> I don't really have a strong opinion but would like to see the work
> finished off and pushed.

I did another forced-push on the declarednull branch after rebase on
master (though a couple of other master changes flowed in almost
immediately after that).

> never easy to name these things.

A problem with TYPESET_DOES_NOT_SET is that it leads to the
double-negative NO_TYPESET_DOES_NOT_SET, which isn't as bad as
NO_NO_whatever, but argues for an option that is treated as "on" for
the existing behavior.  Bleah.

If I do add a separate option, do you think it's OK to combine that
with POSIX_BUILTINS for the tests in the (new) E03posix.ztst file?
Otherwise all the tests in that file will have to be repeated twice
(with and without the new option).