Can anyone explain what the rationale is for this rule? I could think of several arguments for why you shouldn't use NULL, and should prefer a plain 0 (as is generally preferred in C++). This feels like a stylistic issue.
Thanks,
stephen
The standard (ISO 9899:1999 6.3.2.3) defines a
null pointer constant:
Quote:An integral constant expression with the value 0 , or such an expression cast to type void *, is called a null pointer constant.
This means, for example that it is legitimate in the C language to compare a pointer expression with any form of integer constant expression including for example
'\0' or any enum constant of value 0. For this reason it is advisable to use NULL wherever a null pointer constant is intended.
The semantics are subtly different in C++