No. Neither in the language (NULL exists) nor necessarily on real CPUs.

NULL exists on real CPUs. Maybe you meant nullptr which is a very different thing, don't confuse the two.

I don't agree. Null is an artefact of the type system and the type system evaporates at runtime. Even C's NULL macro just expands to zero which is defined in the type system as the null pointer.

Address zero exists in the CPU, but that's not the null pointer, that's an embarrassment if you happen to need to talk about address zero in a language where that has the same spelling as a null pointer because you can't say what you meant.

Null doesn't expand to zero on some weird systems. tese days zero is special on most hardware so having zero and nullptr be the same is importnt - even though on some of them zero is also legal.

Historically C's null pointer literal, provided as the pre-processor constant NULL, is the integer literal 0 (optionally cast to a void pointer in newer standards) even though the hardware representation may not be the zero address.

It's OK that you didn't know this if you mostly write C++ and somewhat OK that you didn't know this even if you mostly write C but stick to pre-defined stuff like that NULL constant, if you write important tools in or for C this was a pretty important gap in your understanding.

In C23 the committee gave C the C++ nullptr constant, and the associated nullptr_t type, and basically rewrote history to make this entire mess, in reality the fault of C++ now "because it's for compatibility with C". This is a pretty routine outcome, you can see that WG14 members who are sick of this tend to just walk away from the committee because fighting it is largely futile and they could just retire and write in C89 or even K&R C without thinking about Bjarne at all.

Just watch it until about half way in.

This is the context:

> and cars aren't mounting pavements to get me...

The US car companies have been given decades to catch up. That's the problem: they have been shielded from competition.

> Why has communism not destroyed that country?

It did. The Communist takeover in the North lead to mass starvation deaths and a flood of refugees to the South. The Communist takeover in the South lead to another mass starvation and lots of hunger deaths.

Your position is that Vietnam has been destroyed?

Because the US seems to be doing a lot of trade with a communist country which calls itself Vietnam. And that country seems to be in rather better shape than Cuba, with the biggest difference the US embargo on the latter.

The Cubans who recently died because there's no power for their ventilators didn't die because of Communism, but because the US is preventing oil from getting to the country. The US could do the same to Haiti, or the Bahamas, or Jamaica. Gunboat diplomacy is back on the menu.

They are counted by hand in Denmark. We used to post the results on physical paper at the voting site afterwards + have them published for the entire country (including a list of the votes at each voting site) in the national papers.

If the local results anywhere were different from those published in the papers, people would notice. If they were different in different papers, or in different parts of the country, people would notice.

We have, unfortunately, switched to a list on a website instead of in the papers :(

It's not the 5-year plans that are driving China and most of the Chinese economy is untouched by the 5-year plans.

Memory models matter.

Does that work for humans, too?

That's mostly because it is syllable timed instead of stress timed. And because a lot of people are not as good at Spanish as they think they are, of course.

I would use em-dashes all the time if they were easier to type.