Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!apple!well!jef
From: jef@well.sf.ca.us (Jef Poskanzer)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: gcc and NULL function pointers.
Message-ID: <25572@well.sf.ca.us>
Date: 21 Jun 91 20:18:12 GMT
References: <9752@cognos.UUCP>
Reply-To: Jef Poskanzer <jef@well.sf.ca.us>
Organization: Acme Software
Lines: 14

Hey, I've got an idea: how about not using NULL?  Using a 0 explicitly
cast to the appropriate pointer type works perfectly for all machines
and compilers.  Furthermore, it makes the code more self-documenting
and maintainable, and less error-prone.

Oh, wait.  It means typing a few more characters.  So much for that idea.
---
Jef

  Jef Poskanzer  jef@well.sf.ca.us  {apple, ucbvax, hplabs}!well!jef
"You can put me in jail, but you cannot give me narrower quarters than
as a seaman I have always had.  You cannot give me coarser food than I
   have always eaten.  You cannot make me lonlier than I have always
           been." -- Andrew Furuseth, Emancipator of Seamen