Path: csiph.com!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder3.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed1.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <levvs9$6o2$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <27ac2248-0ca3-4ba6-9d25-eaad324bc5e9@googlegroups.com> <87sird7wuw.fsf@handshake.de> <le7fso$a83$1@ger.gmane.org> <8454E8CB-E6E3-452F-8E54-9A77BFF34EC2@gmail.com> <1m3gg9lbf2ln5m2kbki954t17mqni3b20k@4ax.com> <mailman.7262.1393078476.18130.python-list@python.org> <53095145$0$29985$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <877g8mcg1m.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <mailman.7286.1393151578.18130.python-list@python.org> <87ob1yay9m.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <08aa32de-cd51-4888-bd60-2c2b53d86ecc@googlegroups.com> <mailman.7319.1393265975.18130.python-list@python.org> <leg7au$ckp$2@reader1.panix.com> <leua81$fjj$1@ger.gmane.org> <CAPTjJmpeLq_7R=Z5J14dpny6XJ0xx-8CnueMJ02pcnDsULZTdg@mail.gmail.com> <levb36$jmk$1@ger.gmane.org> <CAPTjJmrCXrqZzCrvWm7Bb0yG3wDge=kheLL4w83W79MQ4XKGdg@mail.gmail.com> <levvs9$6o2$1@ger.gmane.org>
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2014 06:32:28 +1100
Subject: Re: [OT] Can global variable be passed into Python function?
From: Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com>
Cc: "python-list@python.org" <python-list@python.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Precedence: list
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Message-ID: <mailman.7593.1393788751.18130.python-list@python.org>
Lines: 26
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:67463

On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 6:17 AM, Dave Angel <davea@davea.name> wrote:
> Array size is inside the malloc block, but outside the struct
>  block.  As you can see if you try to delete without the brackets
>  when you used new [], some runtimes will crash.

As in, you have to use "delete [] x" to correspond with "x = new
whatever[n]"? Yes, that's right, but that array size is earlier in
memory than x itself. I can pretend that x is the same as one declared
statically as "whatever x[n]", and it'll function the same way. When
new[] is implemented using malloc(), it'll be something like this:

{
    data = malloc(n * sizeof(whatever) + sizeof n);
    *(int *)data = n;
    return ((int *)data)+1;
}

so in that case, the array size is inside the malloc'd block, but it's
still invisible to the calling function. A fully compliant C++
implementation could choose to store that elsewhere, in some kind of
lookup table - it could then easily catch bugs like "delete
malloc(1)", "delete [] malloc(1)", "delete [] new whatever", and
"delete new whatever[1]" (because the pointer given wouldn't be in the
'new' table or the 'new[]' table, respectively).

ChrisA