On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Derick Rethans <der...@php.net> wrote: > On Mon, 24 Jan 2011, Pierre Joye wrote: > >> On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Derick Rethans <der...@php.net> wrote: >> >> > Why did you change this? It does exactly the same. >> >> No it does not. This test is now correct given its initial goal. > > Uh? Since when is: > if (!foo) > not the same as: > if (foo == NULL) > > Both test whether foo is NULL. > > Please provide an explanation why you think this is not providing the > same results.
NULL is for pointers where 0 is for integer-like. Testing if a ptr is NULL should be done by testing for NULL or not NULL. While compilers tolerate *ptr = 0 by casting 0 to NULL, any other runtime check must use NULL. That's K&R 101. Cheers, -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
