Why is Address Zero Used to Represent Null Pointers in C and C ?

Why Utilize Address Zero for Null Pointers?

In C and C , setting pointers to zero after freeing memory is recommended to prevent potential hazards from releases them again. malloc returns a zero-valued pointer when it cannot acquire memory, while if (p != 0) Typically used to verify the validity of an incoming pointer.

Although memory addressing starts at 0, is 0 as valid as other addresses? If so, why is it used to handle null pointers? Why not use Negative numbers represent null?

Conceptual abstraction

The null pointer is only an abstract concept, a constant, and the address is 0 No real relevance. C++0x added the nullptr keyword to emphasize this. The compiler can translate the constant 0 to another number depending on the platform, just make sure it is not equal to the "real" address, and equal to some other null pointer.

Platform Limitations

Historically, 0 used to be the address used by early systems. Today, according to C The standard specifies null pointer constants. On some platforms, 0 may not be the best value, so the compiler is responsible for converting it to another number.

Reason for choosing 0

Negative numbers have no real meaning in the context of addresses, and the positive and negative spaces will be split between valid addresses and wasted numbers. In contrast, 0 can be represented in any data type. Additionally, The only requirements that a null pointer needs to meet are that it is not equal to a pointer to an actual object, and that all null pointers are equal to each other.

Ultimately, the choice of 0 is a design decision to ensure that a null pointer meets the necessary conditions while Reserved as a unique identifier for a specific address.

The above is the detailed content of Why is Address Zero Used to Represent Null Pointers in C and C ?. For more information, please follow other related articles on the PHP Chinese website!