From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: arnold@skeeve.com (arnold@skeeve.com) Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2018 10:32:28 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] Comments in early Unix systems In-Reply-To: <01d401d3c1f9$ebd18270$c3748750$@ronnatalie.com> References: <20180321141753.25C4418C088@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <6c6699c0-15db-604a-181c-7dad282599e1@kilonet.net> <20180321202810.GA6280@minnie.tuhs.org> <20180322012720.GN9739@mcvoy.com> <01d401d3c1f9$ebd18270$c3748750$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: <201803221632.w2MGWSTC016570@freefriends.org> "Ron Natalie" wrote: > Frankly, I have immense distaste for the definition NULL. Especially > those implementations that try to fix it by introducing a spurious cast > on it. I'll agree with the latter part. But in my own code I try to be very careful to use NULL for pointers, '\0' for end of string, and 0 for numbers. Even though 0 could be used in all three cases, the different forms make it much more clear what the type of data is that I'm working with. My two cents, Arnold