> On 16 Jun 2025, at 21:45, Tomas Vondra <tomas@vondra.me> wrote:
> Regarding the Z_NULL, I believe it has always been ignored like this, at
> least since 9.1. The code simply returns what gzgets() returns, and then
> compares that to NULL, etc. Is there there's a better way to deal with
> Z_NULL? I suppose we could explicitly check/translate Z_NULL to NULL,
> although Z_NULL is simply defined as 0. I don't recall if NULL has some
> additional magic.
Right, to be clear, I don't think there is a bug here (or the risk one going
forward). It's just my own preference of not mixing API concepts
--
Daniel Gustafsson
