[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: 0 vs. NULL (was: Re: Test for getaddrinfo() broken on Tru64 UNIX 5.1
From: |
Bruno Haible |
Subject: |
Re: 0 vs. NULL (was: Re: Test for getaddrinfo() broken on Tru64 UNIX 5.1) |
Date: |
Sat, 13 Oct 2007 22:45:50 +0200 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.5.4 |
Ben Pfaff wrote:
> ISO C says that NULL can be defined as 0, without a cast to void
> *, and it is always defined that way in C++.
The latter statement is not true. ISO C++ 18.1.(3) says:
"The macro NULL is an implementation-defined C++ null pointer constant
in this International Standard (4.10)."
with footnote:
"Possible definitions include 0 and 0L, but not (void*)0."
and g++ defines NULL to __null. The differences between NULL and 0 in g++
are least:
- sizeof (NULL) == sizeof (void*),
- sin (NULL) gives a warning, sin (0) does not.
Bruno
- Test for getaddrinfo() broken on Tru64 UNIX 5.1, Albert Chin, 2007/10/10
- Re: Test for getaddrinfo() broken on Tru64 UNIX 5.1, Bruno Haible, 2007/10/13
- Re: Test for getaddrinfo() broken on Tru64 UNIX 5.1, Benoit SIGOURE, 2007/10/13
- Re: Test for getaddrinfo() broken on Tru64 UNIX 5.1, Ben Pfaff, 2007/10/13
- Re: 0 vs. NULL (was: Re: Test for getaddrinfo() broken on Tru64 UNIX 5.1),
Bruno Haible <=
- Re: 0 vs. NULL, Micah Cowan, 2007/10/13
- Re: 0 vs. NULL, Bruno Haible, 2007/10/13
- Re: 0 vs. NULL, Paul Eggert, 2007/10/15
- Re: 0 vs. NULL, Micah Cowan, 2007/10/15
- Re: Test for getaddrinfo() broken on Tru64 UNIX 5.1, Jim Meyering, 2007/10/13
Re: Test for getaddrinfo() broken on Tru64 UNIX 5.1, Simon Josefsson, 2007/10/13
Re: Test for getaddrinfo() broken on Tru64 UNIX 5.1, Albert Chin, 2007/10/14