Xref: utzoo comp.unix.sysv386:8354 comp.lang.c:39532
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!randvax!segue!jim
From: jim@segue.segue.com (Jim Balter)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386,comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: time(0L) - history of a misconception (was Re: SCO password generator)
Message-ID: <7648@segue.segue.com>
Date: 23 May 91 19:13:45 GMT
References: <1991May14.040042.15199@jpradley.jpr.com> <588@sherpa.UUCP> <1141@mwtech.UUCP> <4138@uc.msc.umn.edu>
Reply-To: jim@segue.segue.com (Jim Balter)
Organization: Segue Software, Inc. - Santa Monica, CA. +1-213-453-2161
Lines: 7

In article <4138@uc.msc.umn.edu> jeff@uf.UUCP (Jeff Turner) writes:
>Of course by definition, passing (long*)0 is the only truely correct
>way to pass a long pointer that points to address 0, but that is toooooooo
>much to type :-)

By the ANSI standard, if there is a prototype in scope, a zero value of any
type is "correct".  Without a prototype, only (time_t *)0 is correct.