Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!decwrl!sun!pitstop!sundc!seismo!uunet!mcvax!hp4nl!eutrc3!wzv!wietse
From: wietse@wzv.UUCP (Wietse Z. Venema)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: use of NULL
Keywords: NULL zero 0 C Microsoft
Message-ID: <224@wzv.UUCP>
Date: 23 Feb 89 20:57:58 GMT
References: <1167@unisec.usi.com. <5312@turnkey.TCC.COM. <9582@smoke.BRL.MIL. <399@twwells.uucp: <973@optilink.UUCP>
Reply-To: wietse@wzv.UUCP (Wietse Z. Venema)
Organization: Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands
Lines: 15

In article <973@optilink.UUCP> cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
>
>Never pass bare 0 as a pointer argument -- but use the stdio.h
>definition of NULL, and the segmented architecture will NOT screw
>you.  
>

Wrong.  Think of the middle memory model of microsoft c where
sizeof(data pointer) != sizeof(function pointer).  One should 
NEVER rely on a universal representation of null pointers.  
As written in a recent article, NULL is a mistake.
-- 
work:	wswietse@eutrc3.uucp	| Eindhoven University of Technology
work:	wswietse@heitue5.bitnet	| Mathematics and Computing Science
home:	wietse@wzv.uucp		| 5600 MB Eindhoven, The Netherlands