[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-commits
Subject:    Re: kdenetwork/ktalkd/ktalkd
From:       Zack Rusin <zack () kde ! org>
Date:       2003-01-14 19:30:30
[Download RAW message or body]

On Tuesday 14 January 2003 14:17, Lubos Lunak wrote:
> On Tuesday 14 of January 2003 20:11, Zack Rusin wrote:
> > On Tuesday 14 January 2003 12:28, Marc Espie wrote:
> > > CVS commit by espie:
> > >
> > > in C++, NULL is guaranteed to be a null pointer. Not so for 0,
> > > especially in varargs context. Will fix some 64 bits arches.
> >
> > Nope it's the other way around. Please do not use NULL.
>
>  There's no good reason for telling other people not to use NULL.

Well, the standard says :
14.10p1: A null pointer constant is an integral constant
expression (5.19) rvalue of integer type that evaluates
to zero...
18.1p4: The macro NULL is an implementation-defined
 C++ null pointer constant in this International
 Standard (4.10).
180) Possible definitions include 0 and 0L, but
 not (void*)0.

Since in C NULL is in many cases defined as (void*)0 what do you do? To 
me that seems like a good reason not to use it.

Zack

-- 
Stress is when you wake up screaming and you realize you haven't
fallen asleep yet. 

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]