Re: doubtful assumptions about pointers

Article View: comp.std.c

Article #6172

#6172

From: T. William Wells
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 1990 21:37

14 lines
816 bytes

Don't ask me why, but 3.2.2.3 does say integral constant
*expression*.

That permits 1 - 1 to be a null pointer constant. And
(char *)(1 - 1) to be a null pointer.

Wierd.

Also, I imagine, it won't help dispel the confusion that seems to
surround null pointers.

---
Bill                    { uunet | novavax | ankh } !twwells!bill
bill@twwells.com

Technical Details

Message-ID: <1990Jan10.213753.3902@twwells.com>

Path:

arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!rex!uflorida!novavax!twwells!bill

References: <1250.25ab3338@csc.anu.oz> <11922@smoke.BRL.MIL>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!rex!uflorida!novavax!twwells!bill
From: bill@twwells.com (T. William Wells)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: doubtful assumptions about pointers
Message-ID: <1990Jan10.213753.3902@twwells.com>
Date: 10 Jan 90 21:37:53 GMT
References: <1250.25ab3338@csc.anu.oz> <11922@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Organization: None, Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Lines: 14

Reply to Parent Message