[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: 0 vs. NULL
|
From: |
Bruno Haible |
|
Subject: |
Re: 0 vs. NULL |
|
Date: |
Sun, 14 Oct 2007 03:48:22 +0200 |
|
User-agent: |
KMail/1.5.4 |
Micah Cowan wrote:
> it is not safe to assume that using NULL, addresses those
> argument-passing problems .... To be
> portable, it must be cast when passed as a vararg param.
Indeed! Good point. Compilers such as Sun C++ really define NULL to 0
(in both C and C++ mode!), and misinterpret NULL in varargs and sizeof.
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, 2007/10/13
- Re: 0 vs. NULL, Micah Cowan, 2007/10/13
- Re: 0 vs. NULL,
Bruno Haible <=
- 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