Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #81599
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c++ |
| Subject | Re: NULL versus 0 |
| Date | 2021-09-26 02:17 -0700 |
| Organization | None to speak of |
| Message-ID | <875yunlmqs.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> (permalink) |
| References | <21138a34-469b-4c7a-9ef1-e9307ba52673n@googlegroups.com> <c52e136c-17bb-4eb4-8407-891571d9ef92n@googlegroups.com> <slrnsl06g7.5o3.grahn+nntp@frailea.sa.invalid> |
Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> writes:
> On Sat, 2021-09-25, see.my....@gmail.com wrote:
>>> int *pInt = 0;
>>>
>>> Nothing inherently wrong with that, but in C, it would be more
>>> traditional to use NULL.
>>
>> It would be more traditional in C++, as well.
>
> Opinions varied. Before nullptr, I always used NULL in C and 0 in
> C++. IIRC using 0 was a common recommendation here, too, for whatever
> reason.
As I recall, Stroustrup's books used 0 when a null pointer constant was
required, and that was probably the origin of the (pre-nullptr)
convention to use 0 in C++ while NULL is more widely recommended in C.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Working, but not speaking, for Philips
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
NULL versus 0 "das...@gmail.com" <dashley@gmail.com> - 2021-09-25 11:03 -0700
Re: NULL versus 0 Branimir Maksimovic <branimir.maksimovic@gmail.com> - 2021-09-25 18:16 +0000
Re: NULL versus 0 Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-09-25 21:20 +0300
Re: NULL versus 0 Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-09-25 21:32 +0300
Re: NULL versus 0 "das...@gmail.com" <dashley@gmail.com> - 2021-09-25 12:08 -0700
Re: NULL versus 0 Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-09-27 05:47 +0000
Re: NULL versus 0 Bo Persson <bo@bo-persson.se> - 2021-09-27 08:32 +0200
Re: NULL versus 0 "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-09-26 23:37 -0700
Re: NULL versus 0 "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach@gmail.com> - 2021-09-27 10:32 +0200
Re: NULL versus 0 Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-09-27 11:32 -0700
Re: NULL versus 0 James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-27 15:03 -0400
Re: NULL versus 0 "see.my....@gmail.com" <see.my.homepage@gmail.com> - 2021-09-25 13:05 -0700
Re: NULL versus 0 Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2021-09-26 06:58 +0000
Re: NULL versus 0 Branimir Maksimovic <branimir.maksimovic@gmail.com> - 2021-09-26 07:47 +0000
Re: NULL versus 0 Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-09-26 02:15 -0700
Re: NULL versus 0 Branimir Maksimovic <branimir.maksimovic@gmail.com> - 2021-09-26 09:38 +0000
Re: NULL versus 0 Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-09-26 15:03 -0700
Re: NULL versus 0 Branimir Maksimovic <branimir.maksimovic@gmail.com> - 2021-09-29 02:29 +0000
Re: NULL versus 0 Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-09-28 20:34 -0700
Re: NULL versus 0 David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-29 08:52 +0200
Re: NULL versus 0 Bo Persson <bo@bo-persson.se> - 2021-09-26 13:54 +0200
Re: NULL versus 0 Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-09-26 15:17 -0700
Re: NULL versus 0 Branimir Maksimovic <branimir.maksimovic@gmail.com> - 2021-09-29 02:26 +0000
Re: NULL versus 0 Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-09-26 02:17 -0700
Re: NULL versus 0 HorseyWorsey@the_stables.com - 2021-09-26 14:20 +0000
Re: NULL versus 0 James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-25 17:36 -0400
Re: NULL versus 0 "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-09-26 23:05 -0700
csiph-web