On Jan 30, 2008 7:38 PM, Dongsheng Song <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > See: http://www.linuxonly.nl/docs/2/0_Page_1.html
It says: This is because NULL is not of the right type: it is defined as integer 0 instead of a pointer with the value 0. Except that is wrong from what the C99 standard says about the NULL macro: The macros are NULL which expands to an implementation-defined null pointer constant So no casting is needed as it is already a pointer type if we follow the C99 standard (I think C90 says the same thing except I don't have C90 in front of me). Thanks, Andrew Pinski
