Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!henry
From: henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: Must a NULL pointer be a 0 bit pattern?
Message-ID: <4511@utzoo.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 22-Oct-84 13:47:54 EDT
Article-I.D.: utzoo.4511
Posted: Mon Oct 22 13:47:54 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 22-Oct-84 13:47:54 EDT
References: <6542@mordor.UUCP> <529@wjh12.UUCP>, <9485@watmath.UUCP>
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
Lines: 12

> As for explicit initializers, I certainly don't see a good reason for
> picking the first element of a union; it is very likely that in two
> variables of the same union type, I would want the initialization to
> occur to two different elements.

As I understand it, nobody is claiming that the "first element" rule is
good; all they are claiming is that it's simple and does not have adverse
consequences elsewhere.  Apparently the various alternatives all have
serious problems of one kind or another.
-- 
				Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
				{allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!henry