Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 6123989
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 23, 20262026-05-23T16:04:52+00:00 2026-05-23T16:04:52+00:00

Possible Duplicate: What exactly is nullptr? I first thought it’s a keyword. My present

  • 0

Possible Duplicate:
What exactly is nullptr?

I first thought it’s a keyword. My present gcc doesn’t highlight nullptr in a different shade. To verify that, I wrote following:

void *&p = nullptr;

So I got some clue from the error that:

error: invalid initialization of non-const reference of type ‘void*&’
from an rvalue of type ‘std::nullptr_t’

If nullptr is an object then is it really a pointer equivalent of simple 0? In other word, suppose I write:

#define NULL nullptr

Is the above statement doesn’t alter anything in my code ? Also, it would be interesting to know other use cases for std::nullptr_t type as such.

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-23T16:04:52+00:00Added an answer on May 23, 2026 at 4:04 pm

    It is a keyword, the standard draft says (lex.nullptr):

    The pointer literal is the keyword nullptr. It is a prvalue of type std::nullptr_t.

    the nullptr is not yet a pointer, but it can be converted to a pointer type. This forbids your above assignment, which is an assignment to an unrelated reference type, in which case no conversion is possible (consider int& a = 1.f;!).

    Doing #define NULL nullptr shouldn’t alter the behaviour unless you did use NULL in a context such as int i = 4; if(NULL == i) {}, which won’t work with nullptr because nullptr is can’t be treated as an integer literal.

    I don’t think there are many other use-cases for std::nullptr_t, it’s just a sentinel because nullptr needs a type.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

No related questions found

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.