sizeof a struc field

[Doug Gwyn]

In article <1890 at uwbull.uwbln.UUCP> ckl at uwbln.UUCP (Christoph Kuenkel) writes:
>In article <11280 at smoke.BRL.MIL>, gwyn at smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) writes:
>> That's not what I've been saying.  Garbage constructs have no type.
>> ((thing*)0)->member is a garbage construct.  It has no type.
>for me, ((thing *)0) sounds quite reasonable.  ...
>so *why* does the standard define it to be garbage?

Why is it that people keep citing one thing then reading it as something
else?

((thing *)0) is of course JUST FINE.  How about reading what I SAID.