delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
Date: | Wed, 8 Mar 2000 13:53:44 +0200 (IST) |
From: | Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> |
X-Sender: | eliz AT is |
To: | Hans-Bernhard Broeker <broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de> |
cc: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
Subject: | Re: iso646.h and some questions |
In-Reply-To: | <Pine.LNX.4.10.10003081242250.16372-100000@acp3bf> |
Message-ID: | <Pine.SUN.3.91.1000308135129.7315F@is> |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
Reply-To: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
Errors-To: | dj-admin AT delorie DOT com |
X-Mailing-List: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
X-Unsubscribes-To: | listserv AT delorie DOT com |
On Wed, 8 Mar 2000, Hans-Bernhard Broeker wrote: > > > #undef NULL > > > #define NULL 0 > > > > Won't this make trouble in C++ programs? > > Why should it? This is the exact definition found in current DJGPP > headers, already. See stdlib.h. Recent versions of libstdc++ define NULL to something like __null. There was a thread about this on djgpp-workers several months ago, and I think on c.o.m.d. as well; you might read it for details. I guess we fixed stdlib, but not stddef...
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |