Re: using literal zero for NULL

On Mar 22, 2006, at 12:48 AM, Paul LeoNerd Evans wrote:

I've never worked out why anybody needs to type "0" when they could type "NULL". Given all the random segfaults, and type errors, and readability
concerns and whatnot, are your fingers _really_ that lazy?

Some of it is more of a C++ thing, rather than pure C. And there was, at least for a while, a period where using 0 for C++ solved a lot more problems.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]