Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!rutgers!ames!oliveb!sun!gorodish!guy
From: guy@gorodish.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: initializing null pointers
Message-ID: <12980@sun.uucp>
Date: Tue, 10-Feb-87 01:30:46 EST
Article-I.D.: sun.12980
Posted: Tue Feb 10 01:30:46 1987
Date-Received: Wed, 11-Feb-87 07:16:37 EST
References: <785@cullvax.UUCP>
Sender: news@sun.uucp
Reply-To: guy@sun.UUCP (Guy Harris)
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mountain View
Lines: 14

>> The most portable thing to do is NEVER dereference a pointer that has not
>> been initialized.  Some micro compilers I've used don't even initialize
>> automatics!
>
>I would suspect that any optiomizing compiler would try to avoid
>initializing automatics--they're not required to, and it takes time.

I have yet to see a C compiler that initializes *any* automatics
except those it was told to.  (If it doesn't initialize them, well,
all together now, "It's not a C compiler.")  You *may* get automatics
initialized to a bit pattern of all zeroes (not necessarily to 0,
please note) in a UNIX implementation if the area being used for the
activation record has never been used before; however, this is NOT
behavior to be relied on!