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