>Okay, the curmudgeon's gotta speak. >Generally used to make a null pointer clear, NULL has been simply eye candy >for the value 0.
For twenty years, I've taken this interpretation as well. But recently, I've been finding places where a comparison against NULL gives different result than against 0, e.g. in pointer validation such as one would do when a function returns a pointer to a string. This sucks because I haven't figured out where it should be NULL and where it should be 0. I wrote my question after I had to check against BOTH to get the right behavior. By the way, in sdk-4, NULL is defined in stddefs.h as ((void *) 0). Merry Christmas. -- For information on using the Palm Developer Forums, or to unsubscribe, please see http://www.palmos.com/dev/support/forums/
