From: L A Walsh <cygwin@tlinx.org>
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: free() and implicit conversion to a function pointer
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 21:46:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <58CB07A8.9010401@tlinx.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f76885f4-f99f-dc50-2a19-cb892a62db7e@t-online.de>
Going by subj and talk below, this is a bit confusing...
But it looks like you are testing 'free' for a value?
Isn't standard 'free' declared to take 1 arg and
return void?
If you aren't talking standard 'free()', then
nevermind...
Hans-Bernhard Bröker wrote:
> [Sorry, forgot to reply-all...]
>
> Am 15.03.2017 um 23:48 schrieb Jeffrey Walton:
>
>> Since Coverity is
>> complaining about an implicit conversion, maybe the following will
>> help to avoid the implicit part (and sidestep the finding):
>>
>> if (free != NULL)
>> break;
>>
>> Or perhaps:
>>
>> if ((void*)free != NULL)
>> break;
>
> Even setting aside that the latter should of course have been
>
> if ((void*)free == NULL)
> break;
>
> those are both worse than the original code. (void *) is _not_
> suitable for use with function pointers. Neither is NULL in the
> general case, because it may very well be ((void *)0).
>
> The reason this is wrong is that C by design treats data and functions
> as living in separate realms, i.e. its virtual machine has a Harvard
> architecture. One of the consequences of this is that pointers to
> functions and pointers to data are incommensurable, i.e. any and all
> conversions or comparisons across this divide are wrong. (void *) are
> compatible to all data pointers, but not to function pointers.
>
> The only code that might actually be a slight bit better than the given
>
> if (! free)
>
> would be
>
> if (0 != free)
>
> The function designator `free' auto-decays into a function pointer,
> which is compared to a null pointer constant: 0. The ! operator does
> that same thing implicitly, but is fully equivalent to it.
---
Free autodecays to a function pointer?
In what language?
It's not a C-function nor a C function pointer.
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-16 21:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <c5af0608-17c4-2270-dbba-c3b704c9226e@t-online.de>
2017-03-16 19:25 ` free() and implicit conversion to a function pointer (was: Use of initialized variable in strtod.c) Hans-Bernhard Bröker
2017-03-16 21:46 ` L A Walsh [this message]
2017-03-16 23:49 ` free() and implicit conversion to a function pointer Hans-Bernhard Bröker
2017-03-17 8:30 ` Corinna Vinschen
2017-03-17 21:01 ` Hans-Bernhard Bröker
2017-03-20 18:43 ` Eric Blake
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=58CB07A8.9010401@tlinx.org \
--to=cygwin@tlinx.org \
--cc=cygwin@cygwin.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).