Re: 0 vs. NULL

[Paul Eggert]

Bruno Haible <address@hidden> writes:

> Compilers such as Sun C++ really define NULL to 0
> (in both C and C++ mode!), and misinterpret NULL in varargs and sizeof.

The problem with varargs is one that has bitten me personally.  Ouch!

But "sizeof (NULL)" is a new one on me.  As near as I can make out,
that expression can yield any nonnegative value, as far as the C
standard is concerned.  I'd be mildly surprised to find any useful,
portable code that contains "sizeof (NULL)"; normally I would think
"bug" if I saw such an expression.

This is a trivial point by itself, but I'm raising it since I'm a bit
worried that I am missing something nontrivial here.