/prog/ - void > null

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-16 9:02

Prove me wrong, /prog/

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-16 9:17

gb2/sci/

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-16 9:21

>>1 null is an expression yelding a value
void is not. fuck you

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-16 12:43

#define NULL (void *)0

/thread

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-16 15:50

Do you really need someone to tell you this? You should know.

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-16 16:34

What? null == void

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-16 19:03

What?! Void is a data type, null is a pointer value. This thread is stupid.

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-17 1:04

if(NULL == *(&(void*)))

{

FUCK YOU

;

}

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-17 1:49

$ cat > test.c

#include <stdio.h>



int main(){

 if(sizeof(NULL) > sizeof(void)) puts("NULL > void");

 if(sizeof(NULL) < sizeof(void)) puts("NULL < void");

 if(sizeof(NULL) == sizeof(void)) puts("NULL == void");

 return 0;

}

$ tcc -run test.c

NULL > void

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-17 2:26

>>9
error C2070: illegal sizeof operand

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-17 2:32

I lol'd at you using tcc, and expecting it to produce anything which can be considered credible.

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-17 3:13

$ cat > test.c

EXPERT SHELL PROGRAMMER

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-17 3:24

>>12
You left 2 empty lines between the quotes text and your reply. Your opinion is null and void.

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-17 4:32

>>13
Well, you know what they say
GNU's Not Unix

Name: Abelson, the Anticudder !MhMRSATORI 2008-01-17 6:19

Hello, I am Mr Satori, am I not?

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-17 7:05

>>15
You didn't do the real Mister Satori's special secret.

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-17 7:26

>>11
compiling with gcc produces the same result, it's just a lot easier to do tcc -run test.c than it is to do gcc test.c;./a.out;rm a.out

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-17 8:01

>>17
Both the microsoft C++ compiler and Sun's C/C++ compiler reports sizeof(void) as an error. I can't test it out on gcc at the moment, but I suspect you're using an older version which supports a broken stanard.

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-17 8:18

>>18
(not >>17 here)
gcc just gives a warning.
gcc supports as an extension arithmetic on void * pointers.
void *ptr = something; ptr++; does mov ptr, something, inc ptr.
Thus the sizeof(void) == 1.

For maximum faggotry, compile with these:



gcc -W -Wall -Werror -std=iso9899:1999 -pedantic -o out -c foo bar

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-29 12:50

http://last.fm/music/Void%3eNull has failed

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-29 13:05

void != NULL

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-29 16:25

ITT, amateur C programmers

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-29 19:42

ITB, amateur programmers

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-30 5:29

>>23
You're in this board, so by your very own admission, you yourself are an amatuer program. How ironic.

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-30 5:35

>>24
1.) Well done.
2.) Irony doesn't meant what you think it does, alright, faggot?

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-30 8:50

>>24
He didn't say that all participants of this board are amateur programmers. His statement implied that there are at least two (i.e. you and me, but not The Sussman.)

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-30 22:36

>>25
I'm the author of >>24, and I just wanted to let you know that I actually trolled you with the ``How Ironic'' part. It's a popular troll which always catches a few people.
So, to make it official:

YHBT. YHL. HAND.

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-31 2:14

>>24
Actually, it could have implied that he, himself too was an `amateur programmer', not `amatuer program'.

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-31 4:55

>>27
How is that a troll?

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-31 6:24

>>29
In my trolling expertise, I've found that most literary fags make a big deal about grammatical semantics, particularly with respect to irony (ie. "How ironic, lol") I've been trolling for two years now, and I've built up a "trolling" library of sorts, it's actually quite amazing.

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-31 6:34

>>30
Two years? new to trolling?

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-31 7:00

>>30
You should use ``i.e.'' rather than ``ie.'', as it is an abbreviation of the Latin id est, which you will notice is two words.

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-31 13:38

>>32
yhbt

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-31 13:48

>>27
ITT, amateur trolls.

Name: Anonymous 2008-01-31 14:13

>>33
NO U

void > null

1 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-16 9:02

2 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-16 9:17

3 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-16 9:21

4 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-16 12:43

5 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-16 15:50

6 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-16 16:34

7 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-16 19:03

8 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-17 1:04

9 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-17 1:49

10 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-17 2:26

11 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-17 2:32

12 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-17 3:13

13 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-17 3:24

14 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-17 4:32

15 Name: Abelson, the Anticudder !MhMRSATORI 2008-01-17 6:19

16 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-17 7:05

17 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-17 7:26

18 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-17 8:01

19 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-17 8:18

20 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-29 12:50

21 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-29 13:05

22 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-29 16:25

23 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-29 19:42

24 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-30 5:29

25 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-30 5:35

26 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-30 8:50

27 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-30 22:36

28 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-31 2:14

29 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-31 4:55

30 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-31 6:24

31 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-31 6:34

32 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-31 7:00

33 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-31 13:38

34 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-31 13:48

35 Name: Anonymous 2008-01-31 14:13