Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register


Groups > comp.compilers > #3349

Re: C and Java, was Compilers :)

Path csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!news.iecc.com!.POSTED.news.iecc.com!nerds-end
From gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu>
Newsgroups comp.compilers
Subject Re: C and Java, was Compilers :)
Date Sun, 29 Jan 2023 21:39:26 -0800 (PST)
Organization Compilers Central
Sender johnl@iecc.com
Approved comp.compilers@iecc.com
Message-ID <23-01-083@comp.compilers> (permalink)
References <23-01-001@comp.compilers> <23-01-007@comp.compilers> <23-01-051@comp.compilers> <23-01-053@comp.compilers> <23-01-054@comp.compilers> <23-01-077@comp.compilers>
MIME-Version 1.0
Content-Type text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Injection-Info gal.iecc.com; posting-host="news.iecc.com:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970"; logging-data="51786"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@iecc.com"
Keywords C, Java, standards
Posted-Date 30 Jan 2023 12:52:43 EST
X-submission-address compilers@iecc.com
X-moderator-address compilers-request@iecc.com
X-FAQ-and-archives http://compilers.iecc.com
In-Reply-To <23-01-077@comp.compilers>
Xref csiph.com comp.compilers:3349

Show key headers only | View raw


On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 8:57:52 AM UTC-8, dave_th...@comcast.net wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 12:39:41 -0800 (PST), gah4 <ga...@u.washington.edu>

(I wrote)
> > > Some time ago, I was trying to figure out if you could make a C compiler
> > > that generated JVM code. I would run much closer to the C standard
> > > than much C code does, especially regarding casting of pointers.

> > > [So what did you conclude? I'd think C type casts would be hard to
> > > turn into Java unless you made all of storage an opaque block. -John]

> > Someone else might have thought about the "opaque block" method.
> > But that wouldn't work if you wanted to call between Java and C.

> > As well as I know it, C only requires assignment to work for
> > pointers cast to (unsigned char *). And once they are cast,
> > usually (though I suppose not always), it is done with memcpy(),
> > or compared with memcmp().

> Only unsigned char is 100% guaranteed, but on all known systems today
> signed char has no trap rep and also works and so does plain char.

But if the standard says (unsigned char *), and it failed with other types,
would it still be C?

In any case, I would put all the complications into memcpy() and memcmp().

Assignments cast to (unsigned char *) could call memcpy().
Otherwise, they would be assumed to work.

(snip)

> > I didn't get as far as figuring out varargs functions, but someone
> > must have done that, as System.out.format() works.
> > You can call it with the usual different argument types,
> > and it figures out everything.

> Java's System.out.format -- and Java's varargs in general -- works
> differently than C (at least C as practiced; the standard imposes
> enough restrictions you probably _could_ implement it differently).

> When Java calls a varargs method, the _caller_ silently creates an
> array and fills it with the argument values, alll converted to the one
> type specified in the definition (or compiled equivalent), and that
> _array_ is actually passed along with the fixed args, in this case the
> format string and possibly locale. For this case the one type is
> java.lang.Object, which is the top-type for all class _and_ array(1)
> instances in Java so they pass unchanged; any primitive value (int,
> float, etc) is siliently converted to an instance of a builtin class
> (java.lang.Integer, java.lang.Float, etc) by 'autoboxing'. As a result
> the format method(2) just matches format specifiers to elements of
> that array (remember each Java array instance knows its own length so
> subscripting out of bounds traps).

But also, Java didn't always do that automatically.

> Or more simply, Java varargs is sugar for a homogenous array.

I suppose, but it is a lot of sugar!
Having to do the array creating, and all the conversions to fill
the array is a lot of work!  And a lot of cases to get wrong.

Some years ago, I was doing Practice it!, which requests you,
in many cases, to write a Java program. The system then compiles
and runs your program, and verifies the output.  It mostly makes no
requirement on how you write it.  At some point, I started
using System.out.format() for my output statements.

If you want to try it: https://practiceit.cs.washington.edu/

Anyway, yes, that is what I thought Java did with them.
Though some of my programs use arrays dimensioned [1]
instead of the usual wrapper classes.

Back to comp.compilers | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Find similar


Thread

Compilers :) "Tristan B. Velloza Kildaire" <deavmi@redxen.eu> - 2023-01-02 12:28 +0200
  Re: Compilers :) Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> - 2023-01-02 20:52 +0000
    Re: another C-like language? was Compilers :) Steve Limb <stephenjohnlimb@gmail.com> - 2023-01-03 16:24 +0000
      Re: another C-like language? was Compilers :) gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> - 2023-01-03 12:52 -0800
        Re: another C-like language? was Compilers :) arnold@skeeve.com (Aharon Robbins) - 2023-01-04 17:12 +0000
          Re: another C-like language? was Compilers :) gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> - 2023-01-04 12:39 -0800
      Re: another C-like language? was Compilers :) "marb...@yahoo.co.uk" <marblypup@yahoo.co.uk> - 2023-01-05 06:27 -0800
        Re: another C-like language? was Compilers :) gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> - 2023-01-05 16:26 -0800
        Re: another C-like language? was Compilers :) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-06 15:39 +0100
          Re: another C-like language? was Compilers :) Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-01-09 17:41 +0000
            Re: another C-like language? was Compilers :) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-10 17:48 +0100
              Re: another C-like language? was Compilers :) gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> - 2023-01-10 15:13 -0800
                Re: another C-like language? was Compilers :) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-11 13:38 +0100
                Re: back in the 60s, another C-like language? was Compilers :) gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> - 2023-01-11 16:38 -0800
                Re: another C-like language? was Compilers :) "marb...@yahoo.co.uk" <marblypup@yahoo.co.uk> - 2023-01-15 04:26 -0800
              Re: another C-like language? was Compilers :) Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-01-11 11:02 +0000
                Re: Scheme is not another C-like language? was Compilers :) George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2023-01-12 02:54 -0500
              Re: another C-like language? was Compilers :) Bill Findlay <findlaybill@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2023-01-11 11:58 +0000
            Re: another C-like language? was Compilers :) Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2023-01-11 10:49 +0000
              Re: another C-like language? was Compilers :) "marb...@yahoo.co.uk" <marblypup@yahoo.co.uk> - 2023-01-15 04:21 -0800
                Re: another C-like language? was Compilers :) Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2023-01-15 22:01 +0000
            Re: another C-like language? was Compilers :) "Luke A. Guest" <laguest@archeia.com> - 2023-01-13 18:25 +0000
              Re: another C-like language? was Compilers :) George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2023-01-13 17:20 -0500
              Re: another C-like language? was Compilers :) Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-01-14 19:07 +0000
        Re: another C-like language? was Compilers :) "marb...@yahoo.co.uk" <marblypup@yahoo.co.uk> - 2023-01-07 02:14 -0800
          Re: another C-like language? was Compilers :) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-08 20:21 +0100
            Re: another C-like language? was Compilers :) Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@netscape.net> - 2023-01-09 04:48 +0100
              Re: C scopes, another C-like language? was Compilers :) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-09 18:12 +0100
            Re: another C-like language? was Compilers :) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-09 11:24 -0800
    Re: Compilers :) "Tristan B. Velloza Kildaire" <deavmi@redxen.eu> - 2023-01-13 13:41 +0200
  Re: Compilers :) Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@netscape.net> - 2023-01-05 01:12 +0100
    Re: Compilers :) "Tristan B. Velloza Kildaire" <deavmi@redxen.eu> - 2023-01-13 14:17 +0200
      Re: C and Java, was Compilers :) gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> - 2023-01-13 10:32 -0800
        Re: C and Java, was Compilers :) gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> - 2023-01-13 12:39 -0800
          Re: C and Java, was Compilers :) dave_thompson_2@comcast.net - 2023-01-28 10:37 -0500
            Re: C and archtecture, C and Java, was Compilers :) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-29 19:37 -0800
            Re: C and Java, was Compilers :) gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> - 2023-01-29 21:39 -0800

csiph-web