Re: [PATCH 3/3] configure: Use 0 instead of NULL because NULL isn't defined.

[Michael Stefaniuc]

Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> Michael Stefaniuc  writes:
> > Actually it's not a cast. It's a heuristic that the compiler has to make
> > to detect a NULL pointer. The best heuristic for this is (char *) 0.

Duh ... that should have been (void *) 0.
> There's no heuristic involved here, the assignment is clearly to a
> pointer, and 0 is a perfectly valid null pointer, no cast is needed.

I was talking more in general and not about this concrete case here.
Both "0" and "(void *) 0" work here; which to use is a matter of style
and thus good for a flame war. But i don't care too much to start one ;)

bye
    michael