Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
  • Search
  • Get Qt Extensions
  • Unsolved
Collapse
Brand Logo
  1. Home
  2. Qt Development
  3. General and Desktop
  4. Using ’0’ instead of ’NULL’
Forum Updated to NodeBB v4.3 + New Features

Using ’0’ instead of ’NULL’

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General and Desktop
12 Posts 9 Posters 31.8k Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • Y Offline
    Y Offline
    yinyunqiao
    wrote on 20 Jul 2010, 10:16 last edited by
    #3

    0 is always 0, it can never be redefined as anything else.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • O Offline
      O Offline
      ogoffart
      wrote on 20 Jul 2010, 10:56 last edited by
      #4

      This is just a matter of coding style.

      If you whish to use NULL in your code, go for it.

      But Qt code uses 0 because it is more c++ like.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • N Offline
        N Offline
        Niak74
        wrote on 20 Jul 2010, 12:15 last edited by
        #5

        Got it, thanks for your answers !

        Have a nice day !

        Niak74

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • K Offline
          K Offline
          kernco
          wrote on 21 Jul 2010, 20:15 last edited by
          #6

          In C, NULL is preferred because depending on the system, it might not be defined as 0 (but I've never seen an example of this). In C++, NULL is defined as 0 in the standard, so both are safely interchangeable. Some people still like using NULL because in their opinion it makes the code clearer. As previous posters have said, it's up to the coder.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • W Offline
            W Offline
            Wolf P.
            wrote on 9 Dec 2010, 11:37 last edited by
            #7

            In most circumstances NULL is more obvious than 0, but it's only a convention.
            (provided that you use 0 only for built-in value types) You can take NULL as an abbreviation for NULL pointer and easier skip the 0 literals, which are mostly trivial.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • R Offline
              R Offline
              Reliance
              wrote on 9 Dec 2010, 12:54 last edited by
              #8

              Defining NULL as anything other than zero is an error. By using NULL, you are opening yourself up to the (unlikely) bug that somebody came along and munged the NULL manifest. But it's a lot harder for them to break 0.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • M Offline
                M Offline
                maciej
                wrote on 9 Dec 2010, 13:04 last edited by
                #9

                "good article":http://mina86.com/2010/10/24/0-is-ambiguous/ about 0/NULL (and nullptr) in C/C++

                Earth is a beta site.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • F Offline
                  F Offline
                  Franzk
                  wrote on 9 Dec 2010, 13:30 last edited by
                  #10

                  There are a lot of companies banning the use of defines and macros just because of the possible risk of breaking a lot of stuff by changing just one define/macro. Since NULL is no more than 0 and not (void*)0 as it sometimes is in C, and it therefore will not generate compiler errors when used inappropriately, I see little value in typing it out.

                  "Horse sense is the thing a horse has which keeps it from betting on people." -- W.C. Fields

                  http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • W Offline
                    W Offline
                    Wolf P.
                    wrote on 9 Dec 2010, 14:57 last edited by
                    #11

                    For your clarification: I'm aware that
                    @ #define NULL 0 @

                    ...and surely I am a define-hater. I used 0 instead of NULL for more than a decade after reading Stroustrup. Today I feel better with NULL written out, maybe tomorrow this will change again. :)

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • W Offline
                      W Offline
                      Wolf P.
                      wrote on 9 Dec 2010, 15:03 last edited by
                      #12

                      [quote author="maciek" date="1291899880"]"good article":http://mina86.com/2010/10/24/0-is-ambiguous/ about 0/NULL (and nullptr) in C/C++[/quote] Thanks for the tipp, was interesting to read.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0

                      • Login

                      • Login or register to search.
                      • First post
                        Last post
                      0
                      • Categories
                      • Recent
                      • Tags
                      • Popular
                      • Users
                      • Groups
                      • Search
                      • Get Qt Extensions
                      • Unsolved