This post is regarding the proposed name for the null pointer - nullptr (see http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg...004/n1601.pdf).
I am wondering why it has not been considered using the already existing keyword "void" as the name for the null pointer.
In my head the word void perfectly describes what a null pointer is pointer at - namely absolutely nothing. And since it already is a keyword it has the benefit of not introducing problems with existing code. On the downside it does make the "void" keyword more ambiguous.
So my question to the board is: Is there any technical (compiler) reason for not using this keyword to assign a null value to a pointer?