Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #81584
| From | Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c++ |
| Subject | Re: NULL versus 0 |
| Date | 2021-09-25 21:20 +0300 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <sinp8h$f3o$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <21138a34-469b-4c7a-9ef1-e9307ba52673n@googlegroups.com> |
25.09.2021 21:03 das...@gmail.com kirjutas: > I'm reading "Sams Teach Yourself C++ in One Hour a Day (6th Edition)". > > (I'm already an expert-level C programmer, learning C++. I just say that as notice that you don't need to overexplain.) > > In the examples in the book, they assign pointers to 0, typically at definition, i.e. > > int *pInt = 0; > > Nothing inherently wrong with that, but in C, it would be more traditional to use NULL. I believe the value assigned is going to be the same, whether 0 or NULL is used. > > Is one style preferred over the other in C++? Why? In C++ (unlike C), NULL is a macro defined to 0, so there is no difference. There are special rules about converting literal 0 to pointer values. However, this was a kind of hack which did not work so well after all, so C++11 introduced a new special keyword for a null pointer. So the current preferred style is: int *pInt = nullptr;
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