Jimmy Johnson wrote: > --- In [email protected], Paul Herring <pauljherr...@...> wrote: >> >>> What should it be. And I hope you don't say >>> p = 0; >> Why not? It means _exactly_ the same thing in most contexts in both C and >> C++. >> > > Because I don't think of a pointer as a boolean, no matter the context.
Actually, there is a 'bool' type in C++. But I understand the point. I'm old-school and prefer NULL assignments and comparisons. In C, you never assumed that NULL was 0. Everyone seems to have settled on that value as invalid these days, so C++ probably adopted it (too lazy to look it up in the Rationale). I've noticed most people are saying NULL is defined as: #define NULL 0 I've also seen (probably C): #define NULL ((void *)0) -- Thomas Hruska CubicleSoft President Ph: 517-803-4197 *NEW* MyTaskFocus 1.1 Get on task. Stay on task. http://www.CubicleSoft.com/MyTaskFocus/
