>> "null character" [...] "null-terminate" [...]
> I disagree as the difference is important and should not be mixed.
> "NUL" is the character used as terminator and not a pointer.

True.  This confusion is one of the reasons I recommend against using
NULL for anything.

> Mixing them doesn't add any benefit. I should add that the term
> "nul-terminating" is older than ISO C, most likely even older than I
> am...

NUL is the short mnemonic I've always seen cited for ASCII character
0000000.  (The control characters as I learnt them go NUL, SOH, STX,
ETX, EOT, ENQ, ACK, BEL, BS, HT, LF (or NL, depending on use), VT, FF,
CR, SO, SI, DLE, DC1, DC2, DC3, DC4, NAK, SYN, ETB, CAN, EM, SUB, ESC,
FS, GS, RS, US.)  If it really is a part of ASCII, I expect it to be
very old, at least on the kind of timescale under discussion.

/~\ The ASCII				der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML	       mouse@rodents.montreal.qc.ca
/ \ Email!	     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B