This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Miscompilation of glibc with CVS mainline
- From: prj at po dot cwru dot edu (Paul Jarc)
- To: "John David Anglin" <dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, libc-alpha at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 14:25:51 -0500
- Subject: Re: Miscompilation of glibc with CVS mainline
- Organization: What did you have in mind? A short, blunt, human pyramid?
- References: <200301021916.h02JG3gC011234@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca>
"John David Anglin" <dave@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> wrote:
>> n869 6.3.2.3p3: "[...] the resulting pointer, called a null pointer,
>> is guaranteed to compare unequal to a pointer to any object or
>> function."
>
> Isn't this going to cause a problem with the gcc weak extension
Any program that uses the weak extension is violating the standard, so
gcc is allowed to also violate the standard in a useful way in such a
case. AIUI, the example in this thread does not use the weak
extension, despite its name, so (assuming it does not violate the
standard in other ways by using other extensions) its address must not
be null.
paul