Re: (NULL == 0) ?

[Zefram <A.Main@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>Bart wrote that ANSI C guarantees ASCII in the cases we need so that should
>not cause any problems.

C doesn't guarantee *any* use of ASCII.  It does make some guarantees
about the character set, but nothing involving actual ASCII.
(Basically, all the characters that C uses, plus the characters with
escapes like '\a', must be in the character set and distinct, and none
may have the value 0.)

>                         I do not see where is is assumed that a char has 8
>bits othar than buffer sizes.  We do assume that char has at least 8 bits
>but that's OK.

ZLE has some 256 element tables indexed by unsigned chars that are read
from the tty.  If char has more than 8 bits, the tables need to be made
bigger.  There are a couple of `& 0xff's, but they're easily fixed.


>Here struct iparam is used for initialisation.  It is used instead of
>struct param since initialisation of a union might cause problems.

There's definitely a problem here.  sizeof(long) > sizeof(void *) isn't
an unreasonable situation.  In fact, it makes a great deal of sense to
have 64-bit longs and 32-bit pointers on Sparc processors.  On Sparc
v9, the natural size of int and void * is 64 bits (though 32-bit
pointers are still possible), and 128-bit longs would be sensible.  As
a union isn't usable here, should we perhaps have two distinct iparam
types, one for integers and one for pointers?

-zefram