On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 19:54:51 -0800 "Gokulakannan Somasundaram" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> Assigning it to 0, will again cause trouble for C++ folks. > > > No it won't, because 0 is a valid (indeed, the preferred) way of >writing > a null pointer constant in C++. > > > > I think you misunderstood me. I said assigning 0 to a enum in C++ >will throw a compiler error.
I didn't though :). See email about new initialization rules. I think that they are much mire in keeping with C and C++. More generally it makes the grammar programmer responsible for behaviour, which is in line with the rest of the C stuff. David's point about C++ is correct though 0 == NULL is guranteed in ANSI C, evenbthough rhe compiler must work it out. Better to use NULL consistently and try to avoid adding to the billion dollars. Jim > > Gokul. > > > List: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/listinfo/antlr-interest Unsubscribe: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/options/antlr-interest/your-email-address -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "il-antlr-interest" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/il-antlr-interest?hl=en.
