Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:58:26 +0200 | From | Rene Herman <> | Subject | Re: kfree(0) - ok? |
| |
On 08/15/2007 11:20 AM, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Aug 15 2007 10:37, Rene Herman wrote: >> On 08/15/2007 09:28 AM, Jan Engelhardt wrote: >>> On Aug 14 2007 16:21, Jason Uhlenkott wrote: >>>> On Tue, Aug 14, 2007 at 15:55:48 -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>>>>> NULL is not 0 though. >>>> >>>> It is. Its representation isn't guaranteed to be all-bits-zero, >>> >>> C guarantees that. >> >> C guarantees what? If you're disagreeing with Jason -- he's right. > > http://coding.derkeiler.com/Archive/C_CPP/comp.lang.c/2003-11/1808.html
He said the null _pointer_ isn't guaranteed to be all-bits zero. And it isn't. Read the standard or the faq.
>>>> but the constant value 0 when used in pointer context is always a >>>> null pointer (and in fact the standard requires that NULL be >>>> #defined as 0 or a cast thereof).
Rene. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |