Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!mcnc!decvax!ima!haddock!karl
From: karl@haddock.ima.isc.com (Karl Heuer)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: references to dereferenced null pointers
Message-ID: <16205@haddock.ima.isc.com>
Date: 19 Mar 90 00:06:48 GMT
References: <51083@microsoft.UUCP> <25EB8EE8.8462@paris.ics.uci.edu> <1990Mar12.175613.12082@utzoo.uucp> <1623@argus.UUCP> <1990Mar14.164539.23685@utzoo.uucp> <16179@haddock.ima.isc.com> <1990Mar15.184903.3397@hcr.uucp>
Reply-To: karl@haddock.ima.isc.com (Karl Heuer)
Organization: Interactive Systems, Cambridge, MA 02138-5302
Lines: 10

In article <1990Mar15.184903.3397@hcr.uucp> john@troch.UUCP (John R. MacMillan) writes:
>Karl Heuer <karl@haddock.ima.isc.com> writes:
>|The only "dangerous" context (other than hacking with unions and such) is
>|when a null pointer constant is being passed as an argument to a function.
>
>``Zeroing out'' pointers with memset, bzero, or calloc is another

Right.  I had a hunch I was overlooking something!

Karl W. Z. Heuer (karl@ima.ima.isc.com or harvard!ima!karl), The Walking Lint