Re: [rfa/cli] s/NO_FUNCTION/NULL/

Eli Zaretskii
2002-01-29T10:10:41Z

On Mon, 28 Jan 2002, Andrew Cagney wrote:

> In C, NULL is typically ``(void*)0''. What ever it is, it must be
> compatible with both data and code pointers.
>
> I think this makes using NULL more robust than NO_FUNCTION?

NULL _should_ be more robust than NO_FUNCTION, but you can never know
what GCC will invent next ;-)

I guess we can postpone this, and use NULL, until we see some
warnings. With any luck, that will never happen.