I have a question about the behavior of some code I have written: Packet Packet_str; when I declare this structure in my main program and then check its memory location via a printf statement and hyperterminal it says it is 0000. This seems to cause problems in the program I am guessing that something thisnk that this is NULL, but... when i check to see if it is NULL or even (void *) 0 it is false but is true only when I check if it is 0x0000. One way I have been able to get around this is to create a variable which i do not use simply to make Packet_str at a different address than 0000. I have included the following code to help better understand my problem. Packet_str gets passed to this function which uses it under the var name MyPacI. Buffer is an unsigned char * in the Packet structure. Also Packet_str is passed in by reference. if( MyPacI->Buffer == NULL)/*false*/ printf("1:Unable to malloc memory!\n"); else if(MyPacI->Buffer == (void *) 0)/*false*/ printf("2:Unable to malloc memory!\n"); else if(MyPacI->Buffer == 0x0000)/*true*/ printf("3:Unable to malloc memory!\n"); the above is true when I do not make the dummy variable in main. If I make a Packet *dummy variable it offsets the Packet_str to memory location 0003 and all works correctly, but... if in main I set dummy = NULL it acts as if I never created the dummy variable. I only set dummy to NULL to avoid optimization on other compilers. It is not needed under keil. In short I am wondering why this all happens. Why do functions assume 0000 = NULL but not vise-versa, and is there another way to make Packet_str not be at address 0000 other than making an unused variable?
"We just discovered this generic pointer behavoir earlier today by looking at the .lst code" Hmmm... maybe time to sit back and have a good read of the manual, then! It has a whole section on generic- and memory-specific pointers, and the conversion rules between them. BTW: Keil's use of the term "Generic Pointer" is not the same as the ANSI meaning...!
I see NULL pointers, I see malloc. Are you sure you should be programming a '51, not a PC. Erik