dereferencing null

[Peter Alexander]

On Friday, 2 March 2012 at 10:01:32 UTC, Daniel Murphy wrote:
> "Peter Alexander" <peter.alexander.au at gmail.com> wrote in 
> message
> news:vicaibqyaerogseqsjbe at forum.dlang.org...
>>>
>>> It's defined. The operating system protects you. You get a 
>>> segfault on *nix and
>>> an access violation on Windows.
>>
>> False.
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>> You only get an error if there is a memory access involved 
>> (vtable, member data etc.)
>>
>
> It _is_ defined, you get an access violation whenever there's a 
> dereference.
> Yes, you can call some types of member functions without any 
> dereferences,
> but this is alse well defined and sometimes quite useful.

Ok, if it is defined, then please tell me what the defined 
behaviour of my code snippet is.