Re: Style Question

[Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@mac.com>]

On Mar 11, 2007, at 16:41:51, Daniel Hazelton wrote:
> On Sunday 11 March 2007 16:35:50 Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>> On Mar 11 2007 22:15, Cong WANG wrote:
>>> So can I say using NULL is better than 0 in kernel?
>>
>> On what basis? Do you even know what NULL is defined as in (C, not  
>> C++) userspace? Think about it.
>
> IIRC, the glibc and GCC headers define NULL as (void*)0  :)

On the other hand when __cplusplus is defined they define it to the  
"__null" builtin, which GCC uses to give type conversion errors for  
"int foo = NULL" but not "char *foo = NULL".  A "((void *)0)"  
definition gives C++ type errors for both due to the broken C++ void  
pointer conversion problems.

Cheers,
Kyle Moffett