[tex-live] Re: [tex-implementors] Re: bug in etex

Giuseppe Bilotta bilotta78 at hotpop.com
Wed Jul 14 18:21:28 CEST 2004

Olaf Weber wrote:
> True, I formulated that badly.  The definition of null remains the
> same (min_halfword), but the definition of min_halfword differs, with
> the result that on web2c, an access of mem[min_halfword] or
> mem[min_halfword+1] often traps.
> This does not happen on those systems where min_halfword is defined as
> 0, as mem[0] and mem[1] are valid array accesses, even if they are
> semantically invalid in the code doing those accesses.

I find it amusing that on LKML there is a similar discussion on 
NULL vs 0 in C code ... if null (in Pascal) is supposed to be 
the null pointer in C, then the web2c conversion should take 
care of it and translate null to NULL or 0 ...

Giuseppe "Oblomov" Bilotta

Can't you see
It all makes perfect sense
Expressed in dollar and cents
Pounds shillings and pence
                  (Roger Waters)

More information about the tex-live mailing list