Moving to AMD64 bit and porting issues

[Ernest L. Williams Jr.]

On Mon, 2005-10-24 at 08:25 -0200, Alex J. Dam wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 22, 2005 at 01:26:12AM -0400, Ernest L. Williams Jr. wrote:
> > Should we use "NULL" to represent a null pointer or "0" to represent a
> > null pointer?
> 
> AFAIK, according to C++, they are equivalent.  See, for example,
> 
> http://www.research.att.com/~bs/bs_faq2.html#null

Well, then what we are experiencing:
0 is an int and most likely 32 bits, 
NULL is a pointer and 64 bits in the 64-bit architecture.


This then must be the problem, which makes using 0 to represent a NULL
pointer not portable?  Or would this be considered a bug with GCC for a
64-bit environment?





Thanks,
Ernesto