Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? |
| Date | 2011-11-16 16:02 -0500 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <4EC424E0.8060506@verizon.net> (permalink) |
| References | (2 earlier) <ja0pub$bb4$1@speranza.aioe.org> <20111116094733.821@kylheku.com> <lnd3crzx48.fsf@nuthaus.mib.org> <4EC41C0B.2040304@verizon.net> <d784672e-5bb7-44d0-b8af-a141aead4cda@a5g2000vbb.googlegroups.com> |
On 11/16/2011 03:41 PM, Harald van Dijk wrote: > On Nov 16, 9:24 pm, James Kuyper <jameskuy...@verizon.net> wrote: ... >> I know of no reason why signed char (and therefore, char) cannot have >> trap representations. However, every statement in 6.2.6.1p5 which says >> that the behavior is undefined when a trap representation is involved, >> explicitly excludes all character types, not just unsigned char. I'm not >> quite sure what to make of that fact, but I'm sure that explicitly >> excluding all character types was intentional; I'm not so sure whether >> it was intentional to allow signed char to have trap representations. > > 6.2.6.1p5 refers to the trap representations for the type of the > object. In other words, if an object p of type void * holds a trap > representation, 6.2.6.1p5 makes it explicit that reading that object > as void * is not valid. So, in your opinion, what is the significance of the exclusion of character types from those statements? What do those statements mean, with those exclusions, that differs from what they would mean if those exclusions were dropped? Please accompany your explanation with specific examples of code that would have defined behavior under the existing rules, but not with that modification, or vice-versa.
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? tim <nospam@nospam.com> - 2011-11-15 19:59 +0000
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2011-11-15 20:51 +0000
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? tim <nospam@nospam.com> - 2011-11-16 16:55 +0000
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2011-11-16 17:54 +0000
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-11-16 11:27 -0800
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2011-11-16 19:49 +0000
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-11-16 11:52 -0800
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2011-11-16 20:06 +0000
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-11-16 14:55 -0800
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-25 04:42 -0800
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-11-16 15:15 -0500
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-11-16 15:24 -0500
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Harald van Dijk <truedfx@gmail.com> - 2011-11-16 12:41 -0800
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-11-16 16:02 -0500
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Harald van Dijk <truedfx@gmail.com> - 2011-11-16 13:23 -0800
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-11-16 15:32 -0800
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Harald van Dijk <truedfx@gmail.com> - 2011-11-16 17:02 -0800
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? pete <pfiland@mindspring.com> - 2011-11-16 21:38 -0500
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-11-16 19:22 -0800
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Harald van Dijk <truedfx@gmail.com> - 2011-11-16 23:08 -0800
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-11-16 23:46 -0800
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Harald van Dijk <truedfx@gmail.com> - 2011-11-17 09:15 -0800
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-25 04:54 -0800
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Vincenzo Mercuri <vincenzo.mercuri@yahoo.it> - 2011-11-16 21:44 +0100
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2011-11-16 13:17 -0500
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-16 00:58 -0800
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-11-16 01:36 -0800
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Markus Wichmann <nullplan@gmx.net> - 2011-11-16 13:28 +0100
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-16 08:14 -0800
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-16 12:03 -0700
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? blp@cs.stanford.edu (Ben Pfaff) - 2011-11-16 08:58 -0800
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Vincenzo Mercuri <vincenzo.mercuri@yahoo.it> - 2011-11-16 19:04 +0100
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu> - 2011-11-16 10:05 -0800
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-11-16 11:19 -0800
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Vincenzo Mercuri <vincenzo.mercuri@yahoo.it> - 2011-11-16 20:58 +0100
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-11-18 15:37 +0200
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Vincenzo Mercuri <vincenzo.mercuri@yahoo.it> - 2011-11-18 19:41 +0100
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Vincenzo Mercuri <vincenzo.mercuri@yahoo.it> - 2011-11-18 19:43 +0100
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Lauri Alanko <la@iki.fi> - 2011-11-17 19:09 +0000
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Harald van Dijk <truedfx@gmail.com> - 2011-11-17 11:44 -0800
Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-11-17 13:16 -0800
Re: when is casting (unsigned char*) to (signed char*) dangerous? Shao Miller <sha0.miller@gmail.com> - 2012-01-22 02:22 -0500
Re: when is casting (unsigned char*) to (signed char*) dangerous? Harald van Dijk <haraldvdijk@gmail.com> - 2012-01-22 12:14 -0800
Re: when is casting (unsigned char*) to (signed char*) dangerous? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-01-23 00:37 -0800
Re: when is casting (unsigned char*) to (signed char*) dangerous? Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-01-24 15:10 +0100
Re: when is casting (unsigned char*) to (signed char*) dangerous? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-26 08:55 -0800
Re: when is casting (unsigned char*) to (signed char*) dangerous? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-01-26 11:32 -0800
Re: when is casting (unsigned char*) to (signed char*) dangerous? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-31 21:57 -0800
Re: when is casting (unsigned char*) to (signed char*) dangerous? Shao Miller <sha0.miller@gmail.com> - 2012-02-01 01:12 -0500
Re: when is casting (unsigned char*) to (signed char*) dangerous? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-26 08:48 -0800
csiph-web