Bruce Momjian writes:
> Tom, I understand your research on the historical usage of null, but in
> PostgreSQL we have not two but three possible uses for n-u-l-l:
>
> o null pointer
> o null byte
> o null SQL value
>
> With that list, anything that makes null clearer is great. I think we
> should just standardize on 'NUL' for a null byte, or 'nul'.
I don't think someone coming in from the street and seeing a message or
code is going to understand that. If you really want to be clear, call it
"zero byte".
--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net