Sender: root AT delorie DOT com
Message-ID: <38C659A0.CB542657@inti.gov.ar>
Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2000 10:46:08 -0300
From: salvador <salvador AT inti DOT gov DOT ar>
Organization: INTI
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.0.38 i686)
X-Accept-Language: es-AR, en, es
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
CC: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>,
        Hans-Bernhard Broeker <broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de>
Subject: Re: iso646.h and some questions
References: <Pine DOT LNX DOT 4 DOT 10 DOT 10003081242250 DOT 16372-100000 AT acp3bf>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Hans-Bernhard Broeker wrote:

> > >
> > >     #undef NULL
> > >     #define NULL 0
> >
> > Won't this make trouble in C++ programs?
>
> Why should it?

As Eli told you we already had a thread about it. The GNU library uses _null,
that's an internal value defined by g++. The purpose? better NULL checking.
That's equivalent to 0 and using 0 all works, but the best thing is to let
stdc++ define it. The problem is that it makes collisions like: standard headers
must define it no matters if it was defined, etc.

> This is the exact definition found in current DJGPP
> headers, already. So if there were trouble to expected from that, C++
> programmers would have told us.

It just makes the NULL checkings a weaker (as it ever was) so nobody will note
it. Unless s/he used it in Linux.

SET

--
Salvador Eduardo Tropea (SET). (Electronics Engineer)
Visit my home page: http://welcome.to/SetSoft or
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Vista/6552/
Alternative e-mail: set-soft AT usa DOT net set AT computer DOT org
                    set AT ieee DOT org set-soft AT bigfoot DOT com
Address: Curapaligue 2124, Caseros, 3 de Febrero
Buenos Aires, (1678), ARGENTINA Phone: +(5411) 4759 0013