From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,
	INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,4c42ac518eba0bbe
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: frsdes@aol.com (FRS DES)
Subject: Re: Programming language vote - results
Date: 1997/12/01
Message-ID: <19971201145000.JAA23777@ladder02.news.aol.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 294208827
References: <347F1CAC.6602@gsg.eds.com>
X-Admin: news@aol.com
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-12-01T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <347F1CAC.6602@gsg.eds.com>, "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz"
<nospam@gsg.eds.com> writes:

>William Tanksley wrote:
 
> NULL is defined as "(void*)0".  I've never seen a
>compiler which failed to
> have (int)NULL be equal to 0 as well, but seeing
>one would not shock me --
> according to K&R 2 (I don't have ANS C available
>right now) ANS doesn't
> explicitly require that.
> 
> The worst part of that
>code, as far as I'm concerned, isn't the use of
> pointers as booleans; after
>all, I can't imagine why a vendor would EVER
> make non-zero NULL returns,
>

The obvious reason is to ensure that attempts to use a null pointer
>to
access data will be trapped, instead of producing spurious output
>or
storage overlays. Of course, if the low end of the address space
>is
guarantied to be invalid, then the value 0 will accomplish that, but
often
>0 is a valid address.

	Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz

-- 


>Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
                        Senior Software SE

This msg has nothing to do with APL.  Please trim comp.lang.apl from replies to
this msg, or start a new (non-crossposted) thread.






              -David E. Siegel
               Software Developer, LEX2000, Inc 
               (Formerly Financial Reporting Software, or FRS)
               FRSdes@AOL.COM