Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 8 Jan 2002 13:58:06 +0100 | From | jtv <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] C undefined behavior fix |
| |
On Tue, Jan 08, 2002 at 10:36:47AM -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > > > Yes, thank you, that part was obvious already. The question pertained > > to the fact that nobody outside compiler-visible code was being handed > > an address for b, and so the compiler could (if it wanted to) prove > > under pretty broad assumptions that nobody could *find* b to make the > > change in the first place. > > How about a debugger?
True. I just figured that actually modifying auto variables that were assigned only once and used only once in a debugger fell under the heading of *very* broad assumptions. :-)
As it turns out, the discussion is now moot since volatile does indeed imply here what I dared not assume it would, and so it might even solve the RELOC problem.
Jeroen
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |