Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!unmvax!ncar!ames!oliveb!3comvax!bridge2!auspex!guy From: guy@auspex.UUCP (Guy Harris) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: pointers, tests, casts Message-ID: <582@auspex.UUCP> Date: 5 Dec 88 17:22:16 GMT References: <11130@dartvax.Dartmouth.EDU> <44100016@hcx3> <9038@smoke.BRL.MIL> <44803@yale-celray.yale.UUCP> Reply-To: guy@auspex.UUCP (Guy Harris) Organization: Auspex Systems, Santa Clara Lines: 9 >Isn't the latter [(void *)0] generally preferable, given its possible >use as a parameter for a function with no prototype in scope? Further, >isn't the former dangerous in this case, given that there is no >guarantee for NULL and (int)0 to have the same representation? There's no guarantee that "(void *)0" and "(type *)0" have the same representation, either, unless "type" is either "char" or "void", as far as I know, so "(void *)0" doesn't guarantee success, either.