Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 beta 3/9/83; site basservax.SUN
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!mulga!munnari!basservax!kvm
From: kvm@basservax.SUN (Karlos Mauvtaque)
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards,net.bugs.4bsd
Subject: Re: Please use NULL instead of 0 whenever you have a pointer!
Message-ID: <218@basservax.SUN>
Date: Tue, 17-Jan-84 18:58:50 EST
Article-I.D.: basserva.218
Posted: Tue Jan 17 18:58:50 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 18-Jan-84 06:22:32 EST
References: <210@basserva.UUCP>, <151@ttds.UUCP>
Organization: Dept of C.S., University of Sydney
Lines: 9

Dennis Ritchie says that 0 is the 'null pointer'.  Read your reference
manual guys.  There is no place in the language where there is null
pointer ambiguity.  'null pointer's as arguments to function calls
must be cast to the correct pointer type whether you use NULL or 0.
You can't assume that (char *) is the same size as all other pointers so

#define	NULL	((char *)0)

won't do you any good.  I use NULL rather than 0 because it's good style.