Re: [CODE] do_dig modifications for OasisOLC

From: Daniel A. Koepke (
Date: 01/08/01

On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, Peter Ajamian wrote:

> Actually that's not true, an implementaion must convert 0 to a NULL
> pointer when an implicit caste is made however, it does not have to
> store NULL as 0 in memory.

Actually, it is true.  It's simply a matter of pedanticism in both cases,
since the net result is unchanged, however, *NULL* is zero.  The actual
null pointer is machine-dependent, but the definition of NULL is not.

I did, however, make a technical mistake (just not the one you thought I
did - although you made me realize it): calloc() does not guarantee
nulling pointers, since it does a bit-by-bit zero.  This is still a matter
of concern only to language lawyers: CircleMUD does not run on any
platform that does not use address 0 as NULL, and there are no extant
platforms that use anything else.  IOW, my suggestion remains valid, if
not portable to long dead platforms.

Thanks for keeping me on my toes.  :)


   | FAQ: |
   | Archives: |

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/03/01 PST