Date:	Mon, 29 Jun 1998 09:17:07 +0300 (IDT)
From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
To:	sl <sl AT psycode DOT com>
cc:	DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>, DJGPP mailing list <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
Subject:	Re: GCC 2.8.1 and NULL
In-Reply-To:	<19980629050543270.AAA215@portC69.Generation.NET>
Message-ID:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.980629091510.1552R-100000@is>
MIME-Version:	1.0

On Mon, 29 Jun 1998, sl wrote:

> 	Ok, to cut to the chase.. Were the GCC authors informed of this
> conflict?

I don't know.  But it shouldn't prevent you from reporting it again.  
IMHO, the more people report it, the more chance we have of getting it 
fixed quickly.

> How do we expect to get this sort of thing fixed?

By requesting the GNU libstdc++ maintainers to fix it.

> How is
> __null (which the C++ define NULL to) any different than "0"? Both
> resolve to "0", but __null has a different type (I don't know its
> actual type as it seems to be a built-in constant in GCC)

You should ask the GNU maintainers these questions.

- Raw text -