Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On platforms where integers aren't the same size as pointers, things can > go wrong if 1) you pass 0 to a function that expects a pointer and no > function prototype was available during compilation, or 2) you pass it > to a function that takes a variable parameter list. So it is a good > habit to use NULL for pointers.
ISO C says that NULL can be defined as 0, without a cast to void *, and it is always defined that way in C++. So it is best to write null pointers in the circumstances you mention as 0 or NULL cast to the proper pointer type. -- Ben Pfaff http://benpfaff.org
