Re: Unspecified behavior in C

From	James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c
Subject	Re: Unspecified behavior in C
Date	2015-07-10 13:36 -0400
Organization	Self
Message-ID	<55A00286.8070301@verizon.net> (permalink)
References	(4 earlier) <97928b10-0689-4a44-b516-56fdadf9e39a@googlegroups.com> <lnh9pea57n.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <cb5f75e3-44fb-484d-a017-47e53b339c53@googlegroups.com> <mnmdvn$krp$1@dont-email.me> <ee9cbc5b-7faf-48cb-9b5a-97f3cf9b9fcf@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 07/10/2015 12:47 PM, David Kleinecke wrote:
> On Thursday, July 9, 2015 at 11:21:10 AM UTC-7, James Kuyper wrote:
...
>> The only things a user really needs to know about standard headers are
>> the things that can be found out by reading the C standard or by making
>> appropriate use of the macros #defined by those headers.
>  
> I would assume that a standard header would include what the standard
> says it includes. ...

Bad assumption, and one that doesn't lead to any useful predictions. The
standard never says that any standard header includes any particular
code. All it says is what the effects of #including the header are:
mainly, that various types are defined, various functions with external
linkage are declared, and various macros are #defined. The standard says
nothing about how that is achieved, and it would be perfectly feasible
to store the information needed by the compiler to add the relevant
identifiers to various symbol tables, without ever creating any C text
that actually declares or #defines them.

> ... I have always wondered why the standard didn't just
> present the header as a C header (perhaps in alternative versions) with
> comments. Following your logic they didn't do that for good reasons. 
> But I cannot imagine what those reasons might be (inability to agree
> on an indenation strategy?) 

One key reason would be to protect the implementation from being messed
with by someone modifying the header files. Of course, the same effect
could be achieved by providing the header files for inspection by the
user, but using a different hidden source of same information when
actually compiling code.

Another reason is that people learn bad coding techniques by reading
standard headers. That's because correct coding techniques for parts of
the C standard library are different from the ones for user code. For
example, if a standard header defines any identifiers in addition to the
ones specified by the standard (and most do, for a variety of reasons),
they must be identifiers from the space of names reserved to the
implementation. A user-defined header file, on the other hand, is
prohibited from defining names from that name space. The purpose of
making it mandatory for the implementation, and prohibited for the user,
is to prevent clashes between implementation code and user code.

As a result, implementations often use names that start with either two
underscores, or one underscore and a capital letter for internal details
such as header guards. I have very frequently seen people who first
learned of header guards by reading standard header files, and
mistakenly thought that this naming convention was part of the "header
guard" concept, and so borrowed the same convention when creating
user-defined header guards. Such code has undefined behavior, precisely
because your user-defined header guard might conflict with the same
identifier being used for some other purpose by the implementation.

You have previously expressed opposition to both the concept and purpose
of the reserved name spaces, preferring that clashes between the C
standard library and user code be prevented by the same method that such
clashes are prevented with third party library code. In reality such
third party library identifier clashes are NOT prevented, but simply
dealt with after they are detected (and in some cases, the consequences
are too subtle to be easily detected). I don't approve of the idea that
the C standard library should use that same approach, and the committee
has made it very clear that they feel the same way.

Another reason is that any given standard header file may be meant to be
compiled by one and only one implementation of C. In that case, it might
be entirely reasonable for it to make heavy use of
implementation-specific features that are very strongly not recommended
in user code that is meant to be more portable. I imagine that this
might be what Richard Heathfield is referring to when he complains about
gcc's header files, saying that he can't speak gcc.

One prime example is the offsetof() macro. There's very simple, obvious
C construct for implementing it, which works correctly on many
platforms, but that code dereferences a null pointer, which has
undefined behavior. The implementor of the offsetof() macro knows for
certain what the actual behavior of that construct is, and will use it
only if that behavior is the desired behavior. However, user code that's
meant to be portable should never contain such constructs.

A final reason is to hide details from the users that the implementors
don't want them dealing with. For instance, any given standard library
function might be implemented as a macro that expands into code with
passes those same arguments to one or more other functions, possibly
with rearrangement of the order, changes in the values, or additional
arguments. As a general rule, the implementors would prefer that you not
call those other functions directly. You can't be tempted to do so if
there's no actual standard header file for you read that refers to that
function.

Thread

Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-07 14:44 -0700
  Re: Unspecified behavior in C Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-07 15:34 -0700
    Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-08 08:47 -0700
      Re: Unspecified behavior in C Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-08 09:11 -0700
        Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-08 10:24 -0700
          Re: Unspecified behavior in C John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2015-07-08 10:46 -0700
          Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-08 13:54 -0400
          Re: Unspecified behavior in C Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-08 11:12 -0700
            Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-09 09:15 -0700
              Re: Unspecified behavior in C Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-09 17:33 +0100
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-10 09:24 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-10 12:54 -0400
              Re: Unspecified behavior in C Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-09 10:58 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-10 09:33 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-10 12:11 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-10 21:05 +0000
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-10 17:14 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-11 09:32 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-11 12:59 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-11 17:21 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-11 09:23 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-11 13:03 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-11 17:15 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-12 09:52 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-12 14:13 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-13 09:02 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-13 13:18 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-13 11:09 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-13 15:06 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-14 08:14 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-14 12:02 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-13 12:03 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-14 07:54 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-14 11:16 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-14 16:17 +0100
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-14 09:16 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-14 12:29 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-14 14:57 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2015-07-14 13:12 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-14 16:30 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2015-07-14 15:54 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-07-14 21:41 -0500
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-07-14 21:51 -0500
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2015-07-15 12:42 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-07-15 16:13 -0500
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-07-16 08:49 -0500
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-20 10:10 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-07-20 13:24 -0500
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-23 02:56 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-07-23 11:26 -0500
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-26 11:24 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-07-23 19:03 -0500
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-15 21:19 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Martin Shobe <martin.shobe@yahoo.com> - 2015-07-15 23:45 -0500
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-16 01:37 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-16 09:42 +0100
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-16 17:05 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-17 01:32 +0100
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-16 21:07 -0400
                We're good - don't you worry 'bout a thing, babe (Was: Unspecified behavior in C) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-07-17 07:21 +0000
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-07-19 20:59 +0000
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-19 22:02 +0100
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-16 17:59 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-16 23:09 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-17 18:48 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-17 23:09 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-07-19 20:57 +0000
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-19 17:22 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-19 18:57 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-19 22:16 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-19 19:30 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2015-07-30 14:20 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-30 15:30 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2015-07-30 15:53 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-30 16:46 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-31 00:59 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-31 17:15 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-31 18:28 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-31 23:28 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-04 04:07 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-08-04 18:02 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-08-04 21:27 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-24 09:33 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 17:11 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-09-06 12:44 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Ken Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2015-08-03 12:09 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-08-03 13:26 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-08-03 17:53 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-03 18:44 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-08-04 17:59 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-08-05 02:23 +0100
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-08-04 21:39 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-04 19:27 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-08-04 00:25 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Ken Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2015-08-04 11:55 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2015-08-04 10:31 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-08-04 13:32 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-08-04 22:46 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Ken Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2015-08-10 12:16 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-08-10 13:26 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-08-03 17:46 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-08-05 12:34 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-14 17:57 +0100
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-14 10:31 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-14 18:50 +0100
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-15 20:59 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-14 11:34 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-07-19 20:46 +0000
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-12 12:07 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-12 19:53 +0000
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-12 16:12 -0400
              Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-09 14:20 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-09 12:18 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-10 09:47 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-10 13:36 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-11 09:19 -0700
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-11 12:56 -0400
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C gordonb.j19di@burditt.org (Gordon Burditt) - 2015-07-11 20:36 -0500
                Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-12 10:10 -0700
              Re: Unspecified behavior in C Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-09 20:13 +0100
          Re: Unspecified behavior in C raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-07-09 11:17 +0000
        Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-08 10:37 -0700
          Re: Unspecified behavior in C John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2015-07-08 10:51 -0700
          Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-08 14:14 -0400
          Re: Unspecified behavior in C Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-08 12:19 -0700
      Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-08 12:14 -0400
        Re: Unspecified behavior in C David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-08 10:40 -0700
          Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-08 14:29 -0400
            Re: Unspecified behavior in C raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-07-09 11:20 +0000
      Re: Unspecified behavior in C Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-07-09 02:30 -0500
  Re: Unspecified behavior in C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-07 22:30 -0400

csiph-web