Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 8 Jul 2004 16:30:07 +0100 (BST) | From | "P. Benie" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Use NULL instead of integer 0 in security/selinux/ |
| |
On Thu, 8 Jul 2004, Michael Poole wrote: > Could you please elaborate the rules of English in which "An integer > constant expresion with the value 0 [...] is called a null pointer > constant" does not mean that 0 is a null pointer? 0 is certainly an > integer constant expression with the value 0, so there must be > something extraordinarily subtle in the second half of the sentence.
He's emphasising the difference between "null pointer constant" and "null pointer", however NULL is defined as "an implementation-defined null pointer constant", so any subtle issues regarding 0 apply equally well to NULL.
Someone pointed out that there can be a difference between 0 and NULL when passing the value to a function lacking a prototype. There's no guarantee that the null pointers of different types have the same representation, so passing NULL into such a function without an explicit cast would also be incorrect.
Peter - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |