Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I don't know if there are any plausible machines out there where int*'s > and char*'s have different representations but in fact just the other > day I was having a conversation about how on certain weird ARMish chips > (where pointers address words, not bytes) that would be one reasonable > ABI given the architecture.
If a (char *)0 doesn't work as a pointer argument that's expecting (int *)0, then calloc or memset of a structure with pointer members probably won't reliably give you null pointers. The amount of code that depends on that behavior is *significant*. It's fairly rare to see UNIX code that doesn't make that assumption. The only possible exception is if (char *)0 and (int *)0 both use all-zero bit patterns but are different sizes. I've never heard of an architecture that did that. (I *have* heard of architectures in common use where a pointer to data is a different size than a pointer to a function, but function pointers are very rarely passed to variadic functions.) -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
