From -4195125737123106722 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f78e5,f1dec9ce20a9c98f X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public From: source@netcom.com (David Harmon) Subject: Re: null pointers (was: Why's of C++ -- Part 1) Date: 1999/08/19 Message-ID: <37d2a599.108214081@nntp.ix.netcom.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 514829338 X-NNTP-Posting-Host: netcom15.netcom.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Approved: stephen.clamage@sun.com (comp.std.c++) References: <7opqvm$vpa$1@news.hal-pc.org> <37B7C714.44E4EFB4@lucent.com> <7pcoem$105@abyss.West.Sun.COM> X-UID: 0000000001 X-Status: $$$T Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Organization: Netcom X-NETCOM-Date: Thu Aug 19 2:00:54 PM CDT 1999 Mime-Version: 1.0 NNTP-Posting-User: source Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Originator: clamage@taumet On 18 Aug 1999 05:31:47 GMT in comp.std.c++, stanley@West.Sun.COM (Stanley Friesen [Contractor]) wrote: >>Would that make the following code legal: >> >>const int i=0; >>char *pc=(void*)i; > >If I had my way: no, never. > >The special case would be exactly and only the token sequence "(void *)0". >There is no reason to extend it to integers that happen to have the value >zero. That would be an unfortunate inconsistancy to introduce when all constant integer expressions with the value zero are null pointer constants, not just the one spelled 0 . [ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ] [ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ] [ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ] [ FAQ: http://reality.sgi.com/austern_mti/std-c++/faq.html ]