Markus Elfring

:thought_balloon: Would you like to take [the C++ guideline “R.11: Avoid calling new and delete explicitly”](https://isocpp.github.io/CppCoreGuidelines/CppCoreGuidelines#r11-avoid-calling-new-and-delete-explicitly "Recommendations around allocation and deallocation") better into account?

:thought_balloon: Would you become interested to [use a development tool like “clang-tidy” for corresponding source code adjustments](https://clang.llvm.org/extra/clang-tidy/checks/readability/delete-null-pointer.html "Deletion of unnecessary null pointer checks")?

:thinking: I got the impression that other source code adjustments would be more appropriate for some implementation details.

[Another update candidate was left over](https://github.com/SmingHub/Sming/blob/02835d8f4e539931c46b16191a6b38f7c0a4b04e/Sming/Components/Network/src/Network/TelnetServer.cpp#L34 "Update candidate: TelnetServer::enableCommand()").

Are you interested to apply [aspect-oriented software development](http://aspectc.org/)? How do you think about to encapsulate error detection and corresponding exception handling as [a reusable aspect](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspect_%28computer_programming%29) in your software?

:thought_balloon: Would you dare to perform a source code search and replacement in another development repository with the help of the shown Perl command example?

:thought_balloon: Would you become interested to [use a development tool like “clang-tidy” for corresponding source code adjustments](https://clang.llvm.org/extra/clang-tidy/checks/readability/delete-null-pointer.html "Deletion of unnecessary null pointer checks")?

:thought_balloon: Would you become interested to [use a development tool like “clang-tidy” for corresponding source code adjustments](https://clang.llvm.org/extra/clang-tidy/checks/readability/delete-null-pointer.html "Deletion of unnecessary null pointer checks")?

>However, not all compilers for all platforms support that. Would you like to point any tools out which are not compliant to the C++ standard according to the linked implementation...

>Probably old compilers. * How far would you like to go back in history? * Would you dare to restrict development support on C++ standard compliant tools? >Probably when moving...