From: "John S. Fine" <johnsfine@verizon.net>
To: gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: Reza Roboubi <reza@parvan.net>
Subject: Re: short pointers (32 bit) in 64 bit apps
Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 02:29:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BF47226.8020505@verizon.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4BF42C4C.2050606@parvan.net>
Reza Roboubi wrote:
> Trust me, doing this in the compiler is a _much_ more sane, easy to
> implement, and clean solution.
Trust me instead. Using C++ and a templated type for the short pointer
is easy. Modifying the compiler is hard. They aren't anywhere close
to a scale where you might reach the opposite conclusion.
If this were a common requirement (both to save that space despite the
complications and restrictions, and to do so for programs written in C,
not C++) then there might be a case to do a difficult project in the
compiler instead of many people doing simpler projects in their own
code. But I doubt you will convince any experienced GCC maintainer that
this will be a common requirement.
> If you use C++ templates, it can get crazy very quickly: imagine
> trying to reference this template based object (using a void short **)
> (for passing to a generic function like memcpy.)
The template would obviously have a conversion operator to the correct
type of ordinary pointer, which you might further cast to void* if you
wanted to use it with memcpy etc. But I can't think of any reason you
might want anything like void short** to ever exist.
> It's an awful mess! The more you try to "fix" it, the more you
> realize it's broken. The reason is that this
> "type-first-logic-second" mentality of C++ is just WRONG at a
> fundamental level, and that cannot be fixed.
I won't try further to fix your bias against C++, I assume that wouldn't
be possible.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-05-19 23:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-05-17 9:51 Reza Roboubi
2010-05-18 14:45 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2010-05-19 5:58 ` Reza Roboubi
2010-05-19 8:27 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2010-05-19 8:55 ` Nicholas Sherlock
2010-05-19 9:24 ` Reza Roboubi
2010-05-19 9:46 ` Nicholas Sherlock
2010-05-19 18:34 ` Reza Roboubi
2010-05-19 21:24 ` Clemens Eisserer
2010-05-19 21:29 ` phi benard
2010-05-24 21:52 ` Clemens Eisserer
2010-05-20 3:16 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2010-05-20 11:36 ` Nicholas Sherlock
2010-05-19 9:50 ` Andrew Haley
2010-05-19 19:08 ` Reza Roboubi
2010-05-20 2:29 ` John S. Fine [this message]
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=4BF47226.8020505@verizon.net \
--to=johnsfine@verizon.net \
--cc=gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=reza@parvan.net \
/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).