Just curious, but why would the compiler knowing the value of a pointer be pointless? I'm not sure what you mean, are you missing part of a thought?
--- On Wed, 2/24/10, Steve Searle <[email protected]> wrote: From: Steve Searle <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [c-prog] Is NULL defined somewhere? To: [email protected] Date: Wednesday, February 24, 2010, 6:41 PM Around 12:20am on Thursday, February 25, 2010 (UK time), Benjamin Scott scrawled: > According to my understanding, If a Pointer has the > value of 0, then it shows the compilier that it points > to nothing, but I thought normally NULL is defined as > 0. Surely the concept of the compiler knowing a value of a pointer is meaningless? Steve -- (o< www.stevesearle. com //\ Powered by Fedora V_/_ No MS products were used in the creation of this message 00:40:30 up 23 days, 8:12, 0 users, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
