>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 11.05.00, 11:11:08, Kenn Humborg <kenn at linux.ie> wrote regarding Re:
[ILUG] memsetting and null pointers:
> So those machines wouldn't support C++ then. The C++ standard now
> specifies that NULL is 0, not (void *)0.
On its own that change does not make a difference, defining NULL as 0
rather than (void *)0 does not change the underlying concept that a 0 in
the context of pointers stands for a null value, which may be implemented
under the hood as a non 0 bitpattern. NULL is 0 in C as well, its just
that its got the cast hanging off it to get past typing issues, syntatic
sugar which is out of date with C++. So memsetting a sequence of pointers
to 0 would still be in the realms of slightly dodgy with c++ as well. But
like I said its obscure and I sure as hell don't stay up at nights
worrying about it
But despite it all I kinda like C and C++, despite the permanent beating
they inflict on me.
C.
Maintained by the ILUG website team. The aim of Linux.ie is to
support and help commercial and private users of Linux in Ireland. You can
display ILUG news in your own webpages, read backend
information to find out how. Networking services kindly provided by HEAnet, server kindly donated by
Dell. Linux is a trademark of Linus Torvalds,
used with permission. No penguins were harmed in the production or maintenance
of this highly praised website. Looking for the
Indian Linux Users' Group? Try here. If you've read all this and aren't a lawyer: you should be!
