Re: question about nullptr

On 11.07.2024 04:38, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

On Mon, 8 Jul 2024 11:08:53 +0200, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
 

To me it's more likely that because of that it had been deliberately
added to support such desires, and less likely that the C-standards
folks need to learn "C" and wouldn't know what 0 as a pointer value
would mean or that it has a clear semantic in such pointer contexts.

 
Back in the 1980s: “I like C because it’s not Pascal.”
 
And now: yet another Pascal feature added to C.
 
Of course, we called it “nil” in Pascal. Which is a name that comes from
Lisp.

You're replying to (part of) my post, so I wonder what do you want
to say (or allege) here?

Janis