> Unless I remember wrong, older C standards explicitly say that the > integer 0 can be converted to a pointer, and that will be the NULL > pointer, and a NULL pointer cast as an integer shall give the value > 0.
The only one I have anything close to a copy of is C99, for which I have a very late draft. Based on that: You are not quite correct. Any integer may be converted to a pointer, and any pointer may be converted to an integer - but the mapping is entirely implementation-dependent, except in the integer->pointer direction when the integer is a "null pointer constant", defined as "[a]n integer constant expression with the value 0" (or such an expression cast to void *, though not if we're talking specifically about integers), in which case "the resulting pointer, called a null pointer, is guaranteed to compare unequal to a pointer to any object or function". You could have meant that, but what you wrote could also be taken as applying to the _run-time_ integer value 0, which C99's promise does not apply to. (Quotes are from 6.3.2.3.) I don't think there is any promise that converting a null pointer of any type back to an integer will necessarily produce a zero integer. /~\ 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
