Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcs!mnetor!seismo!lll-crg!nike!ucbcad!ucbvax!decvax!bellcore!petrus!purtill
From: purtill@petrus.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re:  Re: Precedent for use of = (Actually NULL & 0)
Message-ID: <223@petrus.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 16-Jul-86 11:39:18 EDT
Article-I.D.: petrus.223
Posted: Wed Jul 16 11:39:18 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 16-Jul-86 22:58:45 EDT
References: <2239@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Organization: Bell Communications Research, Inc
Lines: 16

>I've been looking at 4.3 code, particularly for the Sun.  There are plenty of
>places where pointers are used indifferently as pointers to structures and
>as pointers to arrays.  There is code which relies on ints and pointers being
>the same size.  There is code which relies on successive declarations being
>stored contiguously and in order.  
All of these are of course nonportable, but....
>Code which relies on NULL equalling zero
>is omnipresent.  
This is perfectly legal.  NULL == 0.  A null pointer may NOT be 0, but
that's the compiler's problem, not yours.  When the CONSTANT 0 is converted
to a pointer, it has to be changed into a null pointer.  This was gone thru
in great detail a few months ago.

            mark purtill            (201) 829-5127
^.-.^ Arpa: purtill@bellcore.com    435 south st 2H-307
((")) Uucp: ihnp4!bellcore!purtill  morristown nj 07960