Re: execl() sentinel

Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 18. Juli 2007 16:16 schrieb Tom Lane:
> > You should *not* have to inform the machine that NULL is a pointer.
>
> For variadic functions, that expectation is invalid, AFAIK.

No, what's invalid is that using an unadorned 0 is understood as a "null
pointer" by the compiler.  That would happen in a lot of places except
on a variadic function.

However, the platform may define NULL as it wishes, and indeed in our
c.h it is defined (conditionally) as (void *)0.  If the platform had
such a definition then it would work without issues.

I assume the platform in question does something like
#define NULL 0
which would be silly.

--
Alvaro Herrera                        http://www.advogato.org/person/alvherre
"El conflicto es el camino real hacia la unión"