Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here

From	James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c
Subject	Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here
Date	2011-07-27 07:28 -0400
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<j0osoe$3aa$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	<996dhnFhnlU1@mid.individual.net> <j0kvl1$ss9$1@reader1.panix.com> <6e8108d6-cf53-4d7c-940d-8a0dcad1315b@y24g2000yqb.googlegroups.com> <j0mkn1$h2o$1@reader1.panix.com> <b3a1dd20-8ed3-4e8f-8e3f-db6e810a7624@s2g2000vbw.googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 07/26/2011 05:56 PM, Paul N wrote:
> On Jul 26, 3:58�pm, John Gordon <gor...@panix.com> wrote:
> 
>> I am unaware that casting malloc has any benefits at all. �Please
>> elaborate.
> 
> (and James Kuyper and Kenneth Brody asked similar things)
> 
> 1) As Kenneth Brody has pointed out, it means your code will work with
> an ancient compiler in which malloc returns a char *.

Yes, those compilers are ancient. The standard which changed that was
approved before the latest crop of computer programmers was even born. I
stopped worrying about compatibility with pre-standard compilers nearly
two decades ago.

> 2) It means that the code doesn't need to be re-written should you
> wish to treat it as C++ code.

True, but that's not a C issue.

> 3) Some programmers just feel it is "wrong" to assign a value of one
> type to a variable of another, and this will make them feel happier
> about the code. I presume there are no program checking tools which
> feel likewise, though this would help if there were.

If they're right, arguments supporting the idea that they're right would
be relevant; the fact that they feel that way is irrelevant. If they're
wrong, as I believe them to be, the right solution is the re-education
of or the choice of an alternative career by those programmers, not
unnecessary casts.

The whole point of using void* rather than char* (when it's appropriate
to do so) is the implicit conversions to and from other pointer types.
Making those conversions implicit simplifies code like this by not
mandating casts that don't buy any real advantage. Anyone who thinks
that's a bad idea should probably consider writing a bunch of wrapper
functions for those standard library functions which use void*. Then any
use of my_malloc() without a cast, for any purpose other than filling in
a char*, would guarantee the pointless diagnostic they crave.
-- 
James Kuyper

Thread

is there anything unstandard in the c part here Uno <Uno@example.invalid> - 2011-07-25 17:45 -0600
  Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-07-25 23:53 +0000
    Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2011-07-26 01:50 -0700
      Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here tom st denis <tom@iahu.ca> - 2011-07-26 06:17 -0700
        Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2011-07-26 11:08 -0400
          Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here tom st denis <tom@iahu.ca> - 2011-07-26 10:51 -0700
            Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-27 00:08 -0700
              Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2011-07-27 13:41 -0400
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Angel <angel+news@spamcop.net> - 2011-07-28 10:58 +0000
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-07-28 13:58 +0100
            Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2011-07-27 13:24 -0400
              Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Angel <angel+news@spamcop.net> - 2011-07-28 11:07 +0000
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2011-07-28 13:02 -0400
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Roberto Waltman <usenet@rwaltman.com> - 2011-07-28 17:16 -0400
      Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-07-26 09:39 -0400
        Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2011-07-27 07:24 +0100
          Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-07-27 07:11 -0400
          Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2011-07-27 15:20 +0200
          Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-07-27 14:25 +0000
            Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-07-27 08:10 -0700
              Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-07-27 17:42 +0000
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-07-27 12:02 -0700
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2011-07-28 16:04 -0700
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-07-27 22:35 -0400
          Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2011-07-27 13:34 -0400
            Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-07-28 02:13 +0100
              Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Ike Naar <ike@sverige.freeshell.org> - 2011-07-28 07:33 +0000
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2011-07-28 07:58 +0000
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here pete <pfiland@mindspring.com> - 2011-07-28 04:25 -0400
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-07-28 12:26 +0100
            Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2011-07-28 04:24 -0700
              Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Angel <angel+news@spamcop.net> - 2011-07-28 11:36 +0000
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-07-28 15:11 +0100
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Angel <angel+news@spamcop.net> - 2011-07-28 14:50 +0000
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-07-28 17:28 +0100
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2011-07-28 10:38 -0600
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net> - 2011-08-02 17:20 -0700
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2011-08-02 23:26 -0600
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net> - 2011-08-03 16:09 -0700
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2011-07-28 13:22 -0400
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-07-28 22:22 -0400
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-07-29 04:17 +0100
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-07-28 23:40 -0400
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-07-29 13:52 +0100
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2011-07-31 09:19 +0100
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-07-31 09:49 -0400
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2011-08-02 06:56 +0100
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-02 06:53 -0400
              Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-07-28 07:36 -0400
              Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2011-07-28 13:16 -0400
      Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-07-26 14:58 +0000
        Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Paul N <gw7rib@aol.com> - 2011-07-26 14:56 -0700
          Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-27 00:13 -0700
          Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-07-27 07:28 -0400
            Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-27 04:44 -0700
            Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-07-27 08:24 -0700
              Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-07-27 22:41 -0400
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2011-07-28 16:19 -0700
              Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2011-07-28 16:06 -0700
              Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Uno <Uno@example.invalid> - 2011-07-30 01:54 -0600
      Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2011-07-26 11:01 -0400
        Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Chad <cdalten@gmail.com> - 2011-07-26 09:49 -0700
          Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2011-07-26 13:18 -0400
          Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-07-26 17:44 +0000
          Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Angel <angel+news@spamcop.net> - 2011-07-26 17:45 +0000
          Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-07-26 18:42 +0000
            Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Bill Waddington <william.waddington@beezmo.com> - 2011-07-26 11:55 -0700
              Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here lawrence.jones@siemens.com - 2011-07-26 18:11 -0400
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Uno <Uno@example.invalid> - 2011-07-27 20:58 -0600
            Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here arnuld <sunrise@invalid.address> - 2011-08-02 05:24 +0000
              Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-02 18:10 +1200
              Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-02 00:03 -0700
              Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-02 06:59 -0400
              Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-08-02 16:06 +0000
      Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-07-26 18:42 +0000
      Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-27 00:06 -0700
        Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2011-08-02 06:58 +0100
          Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-02 00:01 -0700
            Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2011-08-05 06:22 +0100
              Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-04 23:54 -0700
              Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-05 07:37 -0400
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2011-08-13 08:05 +0100
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-13 08:26 -0400
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-08-13 14:09 +0100
          Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2011-08-02 12:58 -0400
            Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-10 01:31 -0700
              Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-10 08:28 -0400
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2011-08-13 08:14 +0100
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2011-08-13 10:08 +0200
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-13 08:35 -0400
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here "J. J. Farrell" <jjf@bcs.org.uk> - 2011-08-14 04:00 +0100
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2011-08-15 14:43 -0400
          Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-10 01:34 -0700
            Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2011-08-13 08:16 +0100
  Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2011-07-25 17:52 -0700
    Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here "J. J. Farrell" <jjf@bcs.org.uk> - 2011-07-26 02:10 +0100
    Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-07-26 06:17 +0000
      Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-26 00:03 -0700
        Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here "Kleuskes & Moos" <kleuske@xs4all.nl> - 2011-07-26 00:08 -0700
        Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-26 19:43 +1200
        Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-07-26 07:56 +0000
          Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-26 04:50 -0700
            Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Angel <angel+news@spamcop.net> - 2011-07-26 12:03 +0000
            Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-07-26 18:42 +0000
            Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> - 2011-07-27 19:10 +0100
        Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Angel <angel+news@spamcop.net> - 2011-07-26 11:53 +0000
  Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-26 00:07 -0700
    Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-07-26 06:29 -0400
      Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Uno <Uno@example.invalid> - 2011-07-27 21:32 -0600
        Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-07-28 12:19 +0100
          Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here pete <pfiland@mindspring.com> - 2011-07-28 20:25 -0400
            Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2011-07-28 18:38 -0600
              Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here pete <pfiland@mindspring.com> - 2011-07-28 21:05 -0400
          Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here "Morris Keesan" <mkeesan@post.harvard.edu> - 2011-07-29 14:16 -0400
            Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-07-29 20:27 +0100
            Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Uno <Uno@example.invalid> - 2011-07-30 01:10 -0600
          Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Uno <Uno@example.invalid> - 2011-07-30 00:56 -0600
            Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-07-30 12:23 +0100
              Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Uno <Uno@example.invalid> - 2011-08-01 00:01 -0600
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Ike Naar <ike@sverige.freeshell.org> - 2011-08-01 07:50 +0000
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Uno <Uno@example.invalid> - 2011-08-01 07:43 -0600
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Ike Naar <ike@sdf.lonestar.org> - 2011-08-01 15:20 +0000
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-08-01 14:27 +0100
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Uno <Uno@example.invalid> - 2011-08-01 08:02 -0600
                Re: is there anything unstandard in the c part here Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-08-01 15:42 +0100

csiph-web