Am Mittwoch, 18. Juli 2007 17:16 schrieb Alvaro Herrera: > Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > Am Mittwoch, 18. Juli 2007 16:16 schrieb Tom Lane: > > > You should *not* have to inform the machine that NULL is a pointer. > > > > For variadic functions, that expectation is invalid, AFAIK. > > No, what's invalid is that using an unadorned 0 is understood as a "null > pointer" by the compiler. That would happen in a lot of places except > on a variadic function. > > However, the platform may define NULL as it wishes, and indeed in our > c.h it is defined (conditionally) as (void *)0. If the platform had > such a definition then it would work without issues. > > I assume the platform in question does something like > #define NULL 0 > which would be silly.
I suggest that you read through <http://c-faq.com/null/>, which is at odds with your statements. -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
