Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 12:07:37 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas David Rivers <rivers@dignus.com> To: des@des.no, mark@grondar.org Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: NULL vs 0 vs 0L bikeshed time Message-ID: <200403011707.i21H7bY96897@lakes.dignus.com> In-Reply-To: <xzpoergtt6z.fsf@dwp.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Mark Murray <mark@grondar.org> writes: > > I'd like to commit the following patch. It makes sure that for C > > and the kernel, NULL is a ((void *)0) > > This is not correct, because it makes NULL unusable for function > pointers; you can assign 0 to a function pointer, but not (void *)0. > > DES > -- > Dag-Erling Smørgrav - des@des.no That assignment seems to work... I thought (void *) was assignable to any function pointer... (Isn't (void *) assignable to any pointer?) - Dave R. - -- rivers@dignus.com Work: (919) 676-0847 Get your mainframe programming tools at http://www.dignus.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200403011707.i21H7bY96897>