On 12-Mar-08, 04:21 (CDT), Pierre Habouzit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yay for portability: many compilers don't support forward static prototypes
> properly. And then we hear about using (char *)0 instead of NULL for
> portability reasons,
As has been explained, the problem is not replacing "0" with "NULL",
which should be equivalent in any C89 or C99 compiler, the problem is
replacing "(char *)0" with "NULL", which is not.
Claiming it doesn't matter because it works fine on all current Debian
platforms is no different than those who assumed "sizeof(long) == 4",
or that pointers and ints were interchangeable. After all, it worked on
their platform, so why be correct?
Steve
--
Steve Greenland
The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making a stable operating
system and Linus Torvalds claims to be trying to take over the
world. -- seen on the net
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
