Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:...
James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:
I asked Google Gemini "Which implementations of C implement a null
pointer whose representation is not 0?", and it identified 5 ...
I'll add a sixth; while we looked at doing a C compiler,
it didn't get any traction from customers
- Burroughs Medium Systems (hardware nulptr = 0xEEEEEE)
The architecture featured an instruction to search linked
lists (SLT) and the hardware recognized the base offset
0xEEEEEE as the NIL pointer. It was a BCD architecture
addressed to the digit (nibble).
On Tue, 28 Jul 2026 01:18:11 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:
Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:...
James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:
I asked Google Gemini "Which implementations of C implement a null
pointer whose representation is not 0?", and it identified 5 ...
I'll add a sixth; while we looked at doing a C compiler,BCD should have been a much bigger problem than nullptr. Everything
it didn't get any traction from customers
- Burroughs Medium Systems (hardware nulptr = 0xEEEEEE)
The architecture featured an instruction to search linked
lists (SLT) and the hardware recognized the base offset
0xEEEEEE as the NIL pointer. It was a BCD architecture
addressed to the digit (nibble).
since C89 has required 'pure binary (magnitude)' for integer types,
and effectively a binary fraction for FP. How could you have gotten
bit operators (& | ^ ~ << >>) to work right?
On Tue, 28 Jul 2026 01:18:11 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:
Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:...
James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:
I asked Google Gemini "Which implementations of C implement a null
pointer whose representation is not 0?", and it identified 5 ...
I'll add a sixth; while we looked at doing a C compiler,BCD should have been a much bigger problem than nullptr. Everything
it didn't get any traction from customers
- Burroughs Medium Systems (hardware nulptr = 0xEEEEEE)
The architecture featured an instruction to search linked
lists (SLT) and the hardware recognized the base offset
0xEEEEEE as the NIL pointer. It was a BCD architecture
addressed to the digit (nibble).
since C89 has required 'pure binary (magnitude)' for integer types,
and effectively a binary fraction for FP. How could you have gotten
bit operators (& | ^ ~ << >>) to work right?
On Tue, 28 Jul 2026 01:18:11 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:
Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:
James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:
...
I asked Google Gemini "Which implementations of C implement a null
pointer whose representation is not 0?", and it identified 5 ...
I'll add a sixth; while we looked at doing a C compiler,
it didn't get any traction from customers
- Burroughs Medium Systems (hardware nulptr = 0xEEEEEE)
The architecture featured an instruction to search linked
lists (SLT) and the hardware recognized the base offset
0xEEEEEE as the NIL pointer. It was a BCD architecture
addressed to the digit (nibble).
BCD should have been a much bigger problem than nullptr. Everything
since C89 has required 'pure binary (magnitude)' for integer types,
and effectively a binary fraction for FP. [...]
How could you have gotten bit operators (& | ^ ~ << >>) to work
right?
| Sysop: | Tetrazocine |
|---|---|
| Location: | Melbourne, VIC, Australia |
| Users: | 8 |
| Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
| Uptime: | 14:41:04 |
| Calls: | 220 |
| Files: | 21,513 |
| Messages: | 83,058 |