RE: [Dev-C++] Why doesn't this compile?

[Ioannis V. <no...@ho...>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev...@li...=20
> [mailto:dev...@li...] On Behalf=20
> Of Andrew Vidler
> Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2002 6:05 PM
> To: 'C++ Dev'
> Subject: RE: [Dev-C++] Why doesn't this compile?
>=20
>=20
> Ummm...MY_TYPE can be any type, change it to "float" if you like,
> doesn't make any difference like I said.
> I know the constructors etc... aren't strictly needed, they don't stop
> it compiling or working though.
> Also, the constructors etc... *are* required for the actual
> implementation - this is just a stripped down and renamed version for
> test perposes.
>=20
> Oh, and I disagree with the "better to 'return 0'" comment :)
> 0 is an integer, I know NULL is just #defined as 0, but using NULL
> implies a pointer type.
> You wouldn't type the following:
>=20
> UINT I =3D 27 + NULL;
>=20
> Would you?, so why write:
>=20
> UINT *p =3D 0;
>=20
> ?


"The C++ Programming Language" 3rd Edition or Special Edition (you must
have this book):

On page 88, 5.1.1.
On page 835 the first paragraph.



Ioannis

* Ioannis Vranos
* Programming pages: http://www.noicys.freeurl.com
* Alternative URL: http://run.to/noicys