From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from euclid.skiles.gatech.edu (list@euclid.skiles.gatech.edu [130.207.146.50]) by melb.werple.net.au (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id HAA09097 for ; Sun, 26 May 1996 07:06:10 +1000 (EST) Received: (from list@localhost) by euclid.skiles.gatech.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) id QAA07437; Sat, 25 May 1996 16:52:18 -0400 (EDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 16:52:18 -0400 (EDT) From: Zefram Message-Id: <13043.199605252052@stone.dcs.warwick.ac.uk> Subject: Re: clwords bugfix To: coleman@math.gatech.edu (Richard Coleman) Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 21:52:09 +0100 (BST) Cc: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu In-Reply-To: <199605251802.OAA20740@redwood.skiles.gatech.edu> from "Richard Coleman" at May 25, 96 02:02:46 pm X-Loop: zefram@dcs.warwick.ac.uk X-Stardate: [-31]7559.34 X-US-Congress: Moronic fuckers MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"g6BHa1.0.7q1.1Ctfn"@euclid> Resent-From: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1176 X-Loop: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu Precedence: list Resent-Sender: zsh-workers-request@math.gatech.edu >What Unix has a NULL that isn't all-bits-zero? I'm not sure about Unices, but the C FAQ does list more than one system. > That would break >a tremendous amount of code. There all lots of places in zsh >that assume this and use memset. I don't think we should change >this. I haven't noticed any other places that use memset for this purpose. I only noticed this one because I was looking for this particular bug. I think if there are other places that do this we should fix them because they are broken. GCC can probably optimise looped assignments to be almost as good as memset on systems where NULL is all-bits-zero. -zefram