Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!bbn!uwmcsd1!ig!agate!helios.ee.lbl.gov!nosc!ucsd!ucsdhub!hp-sdd!hplabs!hpda!hp-sde!hpcea!hpnmdla!hpsrli!darrylo From: darrylo@hpsrli.HP.COM (Darryl Okahata) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: Re: Re: null pointers (was: negative addresses) Message-ID: <90001@hpsrli.HP.COM> Date: 20 Jun 88 16:06:23 GMT References: <226@proxftl.UUCP> Organization: HP Network Measurements Div, Santa Rosa, CA Lines: 35 In comp.arch, jeffa@hpmwtla.HP.COM (Jeff Aguilera) writes: > ANSI C is not C. Prototypes do not exist in C. Please show me where in > K&R that it states that "0" refers to the NULL pointer irrespective of the Pages 97-98 of K&R, first edition: "We write NULL instead of zero, however, to indicate more clearly that this is a special value for a pointer. In general, integers cannot meaningfully be assigned to pointer; zero is a special case." For the second edition of K&R ("ANSI C"), a passage similar to the above appears somewhere around page 102. > underlying implementation. Mr. Wells, if "0" does refer to the null > pointer, why do some systems have #define NULL (-1) in stdio? My Personally, I think that ANY "C" compiler that does not assign 0 (or even 0L - yuk) to NULL is busted. Using a compiler that defines NULL as (-1), try porting any program that appears in comp.sources.*. You'll find that it's a nightmare, as almost ALL C programs make the assumption that NULL is 0. [ ... ] > Jeff "still wondering when C will be as clean as Algol-68" Aguilera OK, this topic has been brought up for the N-th to the i-th time. Time to kill it. -- Darryl Okahata {hplabs!hpccc!, hpfcla!} hpsrla!darrylo CompuServe: 75206,3074 Disclaimer: the above is the author's personal opinion and is not the opinion or policy of his employer or of the little green men that have been following him all day.