Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucsd!ames!uhccux!munnari.oz.au!cs.mu.oz.au!ok
From: ok@cs.mu.oz.au (Richard O'Keefe)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Abandon NULL for (0)
Message-ID: <2321@munnari.oz.au>
Date: 7 Oct 89 09:25:02 GMT
References: <15571@nswitgould.cs.uts.oz> <16178@vail.ICO.ISC.COM>
Sender: news@cs.mu.oz.au
Lines: 5

In article <16178@vail.ICO.ISC.COM>, rcd@ico.ISC.COM (Dick Dunn) writes:
> NULL should never need to be defined as 0L.

Right on!  _Please_ don't do that; there _are_ machines with 64-bit
"long"s and 32-bit pointers, you know.  [Well, at least one, anyway.]