On Mon, 30 Nov 2009, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
IIRC, it was trying to build libltdl with some old C++ compiler (maybe Solaris 7 or so, but I don't recall clearly) which complained about the use of NULL which drove me to using '0' in slist.c. I googled for NULL vs 0, and it seems there it has become a religious issue.
The definition of NULL in system headers has been inconsistent and sometimes the definition of NULL is not so friendly for C++. However, both C and C++ will consistently accept 0 both to initialize and compare with a pointer value.
Bob -- Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer, http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/
