Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Is this the ultimate stack-smash fix? | From | Xavier Bestel <> | Date | 21 Feb 2001 10:30:36 +0100 |
| |
Le 21 Feb 2001 01:13:03 +0100, Andreas Bombe a écrit : > On Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 10:09:55AM +0100, Xavier Bestel wrote: > > Le 20 Feb 2001 02:10:12 +0100, Andreas Bombe a écrit : > > > On Sat, Feb 17, 2001 at 09:53:48PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > > > Peter Samuelson <peter@cadcamlab.org> writes: > > > > > It also sounds like you will be > > > > > breaking the extremely useful C postulate that, at the ABI level at > > > > > least, arrays and pointers are equivalent. I can't see *how* you plan > > > > > to work around that one. > > > > > > > > Huh? Pointers and arrays are clearly different at the ABI level. > > > > > > > > A pointer is a word that contains an address of something. > > > > An array is an array. > > > > > > An array is a word that contains the address of the first element. > > > > > > No. Exercise 3: compile and run this: > > file a.c: > > char array[] = "I'm really an array"; > > > > file b.c: > > extern char* array; > > > > main() { printf("array = %s\n", array); } > > > > ... and watch it biting the dust ! > > Deliberately linking to the wrong symbol is not a point. Might as well > replace file a.c with "int array = 0;". That'll also bite the dust. So? > > > in short: an array is NOT a pointer. > > In this context we were talking *function calls*, not confusing the > linker. And whether you say "char array[];" or "char *const array;", > array is a pointer. Even more so at the ABI = function call interface.
OK, I missed this. There are no arrays in the function call interface, they are promoted to pointers.
Xav
- 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/
| |