Re: using literal zero for NULL

On Mar 22, 2006, at 8:12 AM, Enrico Weigelt wrote:

* Jon A. Cruz <jon joncruz org> schrieb:

I've never worked out why anybody needs to type "0" when they could
"NULL". Given all the random segfaults, and type errors, and
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.

In other words: people used broken C++ compilers ?

Not really.

In other words, C++ is a fair bit different than C. (Remember, it used to be that incompatible ABI was a design goal of C++, etc.)

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