Re: NULL = ((void *)0) problem

Article View: gnu.g++.help

Article #788

#788

From: rjf
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 1995 21:05

14 lines
1260 bytes

In article <KANZE.95Oct9120444@slsvgqt.lts.sel.alcatel.de> kanze@lts.sel.alcatel.de (James Kanze US/ESC 60/3/141 #40763) writes:

>But this is exactly what Fergus was saying.  There is already one
>(very) special case; it wouldn't really take any more black magic to
>make the constant expression ``(void*)0'' (or any expression which
>evaluates to it) a special case, too.

This thread (which I started) has been very interesting, and I
actually understand some of it -- however, I am curious -- is the
assertion by the GNU compiler that ANSI does not allow the conversion
of ((void *)0) to some object pointer valid?

Is this ANSI's position?
rjf

Technical Details

Message-ID: <RJF.95Oct09140502@KRUSTY>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!news.indirect.com!rjf

References:

<435jf3$1iq@globe.indirect.com> <44vqv4$ael@s02.pavilion.co.uk> <4546nd$nnl@oldfart.ecl.wustl.edu> <9528023.17178@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> <45666e$amf@engnews2.Eng.Sun.COM> <KANZE.95Oct9120444@slsvgqt.lts.sel.alcatel.de>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!news.indirect.com!rjf
From: rjf@infograph.com (rjf)
Newsgroups: gnu.g++.help,comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: NULL = ((void *)0) problem
Date: 09 Oct 1995 21:05:02 GMT
Organization: Internet Direct, Inc.
Message-ID: <RJF.95Oct09140502@KRUSTY>
References: <435jf3$1iq@globe.indirect.com> <44vqv4$ael@s02.pavilion.co.uk>
 <4546nd$nnl@oldfart.ecl.wustl.edu> <9528023.17178@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>
 <45666e$amf@engnews2.Eng.Sun.COM>
 <KANZE.95Oct9120444@slsvgqt.lts.sel.alcatel.de>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 165.247.50.21
In-reply-to: kanze@lts.sel.alcatel.de's message of 09 Oct 1995 11:04:44 GMT

Reply to Parent Message