Why is NULL/0 an illegal memory location for an object?
Posted
by aioobe
on Stack Overflow
See other posts from Stack Overflow
or by aioobe
Published on 2010-06-02T18:36:36Z
Indexed on
2010/06/02
18:44 UTC
Read the original article
Hit count: 223
I understand the purpose of the NULL
constant in C/C++, and I understand that it needs to be represented some way internally.
My question is: Is there some fundamental reason why the 0-address would be an invalid memory-location for an object in C/C++? Or are we in theory "wasting" one byte of memory due to this reservation?
© Stack Overflow or respective owner