>> If we use 0x0, it can be a valid pointer. >> If we use NULL, it's not expected to work and will eventually >> generate a syntax erro.
Then someone has severely broken compatability with older versions of C. 0x0 and (when one of the suitable #includes has been done) NULL have both historically been perfectly good null pointer constants. Also...syntax error? Really? _Syntax_ error?? I'd really like to see what they've done to the grammar to lead to that; I'm having trouble imagining how that would be done. /~\ The ASCII Mouse \ / Ribbon Campaign X Against HTML mo...@rodents-montreal.org / \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
