Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| Message-ID | <4EE68424.3040300@loria.fr> (permalink) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-12-12 23:45 +0100 |
| From | Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: Repeated types in union |
| References | <jc0l4g$cvr$1@speranza.aioe.org> <jc0p44$dr1$1@dont-email.me> <jc5n1o$98m$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| Organization | Guest of ProXad - France |
Am 12/12/2011 09:09 PM, schrieb Edward Rutherford: > Thanks for the explanation, Eric. > > Does that mean the "It's Legal" brigade would say it's always legal to > read an unsigned char from an union, whatever was previously stored in > it, on the grounds that an unsigned char cannot contain a trap > representation? One thing is sure, the standard explicitly mandates to copy any object (with memcpy) to an array of `unsigned char`. This is even the way the term object representation is introduced. So first of all this means that we are allowed to read all the bytes of a union. Second it means that all bytes of of the object representation can be interpreted as unsigned char. Jens
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Repeated types in union Edward Rutherford <edward.p.rutherford79@REMOVETHIS.gmail.com> - 2011-12-10 22:06 +0000
Re: Repeated types in union Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2011-12-11 00:11 +0100
Re: Repeated types in union Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-12-10 18:14 -0500
Re: Repeated types in union Edward Rutherford <edward.p.rutherford79@REMOVETHIS.gmail.com> - 2011-12-12 20:09 +0000
Re: Repeated types in union Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2011-12-12 23:45 +0100
Re: Repeated types in union Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-12-12 19:48 -0500
Re: Repeated types in union "christian.bau" <christian.bau@cbau.wanadoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-13 15:17 -0800
Re: Repeated types in union Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-12-13 15:29 -0800
Re: Repeated types in union James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-12-13 18:30 -0500
Re: Repeated types in union Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2011-12-14 17:40 +0100
Re: Repeated types in union Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-25 13:28 -0800
Re: Repeated types in union Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-25 15:04 -0800
Re: Repeated types in union ralph <nt_consulting64@yahoo.net> - 2011-12-12 14:50 -0600
Re: Repeated types in union Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-25 14:53 -0800
Re: Repeated types in union Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2011-12-10 22:04 -0800
Re: Repeated types in union "christian.bau" <christian.bau@cbau.wanadoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-12 09:49 -0800
Re: Repeated types in union Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2011-12-12 20:09 +0100
Re: Repeated types in union "christian.bau" <christian.bau@cbau.wanadoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-13 15:10 -0800
Re: Repeated types in union Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2011-12-14 00:24 +0100
Re: Repeated types in union Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-25 13:46 -0800
Re: Repeated types in union Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-25 13:42 -0800
Re: Repeated types in union Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-25 13:36 -0800
csiph-web