copying Vector elements into Dynamic Array

[James Kanze]

[...]

The reason I say the implicit conversion is arguably more important is
because it's what makes it reasonable to define NULL as a pointer to
void rather than an int. IOW, the one is more or less a consequence of
the other.

Reread that, and please explain why it is more reasonable to
define a "null POINTER constant" as an int than as a pointer
(regardless of type). Implicit conversion (other than the null
pointer conversion) are irrelevant, because we're talking about
a special case, where compiler magic is involved.

The only thing one can really conclude is that none of this is
reasonable, and that we really need a real null pointer type
(for which there is a proposal, so we might actually get it in
the next version of the standard).

 

[Jerry Coffin]

[...]

The reason I say the implicit conversion is arguably more important is
because it's what makes it reasonable to define NULL as a pointer to
void rather than an int. IOW, the one is more or less a consequence of
the other.

Reread that, and please explain why it is more reasonable to
define a "null POINTER constant" as an int than as a pointer
(regardless of type).

That's not what I meant -- I meant that (in C) you can define NULL as a
pointer to void. In C++, such a definition would be essentially unusable
because you'd have to explicitly cast it every time you mixed it with a
pointer to any other type (i.e. constantly).

[ ... ]

The only thing one can really conclude is that none of this is
reasonable, and that we really need a real null pointer type
(for which there is a proposal, so we might actually get it in
the next version of the standard).

I have no problem with that at all -- quite the contrary, I hope it
makes it into the standard. I think it's a good and useful addition to
the language. The implicit conversion from int to pointer causes quite a
few problems, and while I suppose it can't be eliminated immediately,
adding a usable replacement seems like a good first step toward doing
so.