Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: Is this poor style? |
| Date | 2015-03-25 16:38 -0700 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <kfnsics8x6m.fsf@x-alumni2.alumni.caltech.edu> (permalink) |
| References | (7 earlier) <slrnmar573.4et.grahn+nntp@frailea.sa.invalid> <265c9e8c-9af4-4bbc-82e9-0801d11ad853@googlegroups.com> <slrnmb8hf6.4et.grahn+nntp@frailea.sa.invalid> <kfnmw31eolx.fsf@x-alumni2.alumni.caltech.edu> <69396a4c-1349-45ac-a040-02565e9c9c93@googlegroups.com> |
Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> writes:
> On Wednesday, March 25, 2015 at 3:35:19 AM UTC, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>
>> For what you want to do I think having a single function produces
>> a better result (I tried several other formulations). The
>> definition above though is longer and more complicated than it
>> needs to be. The example below retains the interface and semantics
>> of the original, not counting the reliance there on alphabetic
>> characters being contiguous, the unstated reliance here on
>> CHAR_BIT == 8, and the added 'restrict' qualifiers which
>> presumably also could apply to the original:
>>
>> const void*
>> hexdump( char *restrict p, size_t size, const void* begin, const void* end ){
>> static char hex[] = "0123456789abcdef";
>> const unsigned char *restrict q = begin;
>> size_t k = ((char*)end - (char*)begin) * 3;
>>
>> for( size_t n = k < size ? k : size; n > 2; q++, n -= 3 ){
>> *p++ = hex[ *q / 16 ];
>> *p++ = hex[ *q % 16 ];
>> if( n > 5 ) *p++ = ' ';
>> }
>>
>> *p = 0;
>> return q;
>> }
>
> I believe the restrict is superfluous, as a const-qualified
> pointer can be assumed not to alias a non-const pointer.
No, that assumption is not safe in general. In fact I ran into a
case the other day very much like this one, where one pointed-to
type was const and the other wasn't, where adding 'restrict's
improved the code that was generated.
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Is this poor style? "S.K.R. de Jong" <SKRdJ@nowhere.net> - 2015-01-04 00:46 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-01-03 16:58 -0800
Re: Is this poor style? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-01-04 20:37 +1300
Re: Is this poor style? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-01-04 02:32 -0800
Re: Is this poor style? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-01-05 09:39 +1300
Re: Is this poor style? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-01-04 22:53 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-01-04 01:29 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-01-04 00:00 -0600
Re: Is this poor style? Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-01-04 02:20 -0600
Re: Is this poor style? August Karlstrom <fusionfile@gmail.com> - 2015-01-04 15:46 +0100
Re: Is this poor style? Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2015-01-04 15:10 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? August Karlstrom <fusionfile@gmail.com> - 2015-01-04 17:06 +0100
Re: Is this poor style? Clark Smith <noaddress@nowhere.net> - 2015-01-04 15:30 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-01-04 07:44 -0800
Re: Is this poor style? Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2015-01-05 00:35 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-01-05 01:02 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2015-01-05 01:43 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-01-05 11:35 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-01-05 12:58 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2015-01-05 13:14 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-01-05 22:02 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-01-05 14:24 -0800
Re: Is this poor style? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-01-06 12:26 +1300
Re: Is this poor style? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-01-06 02:40 -0800
Re: Is this poor style? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-01-07 19:32 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2015-01-07 20:03 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-01-07 20:27 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-01-08 09:55 +1300
Re: Is this poor style? Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2015-01-07 18:13 -0600
Re: Is this poor style? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-01-08 13:17 +1300
Re: Is this poor style? Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2015-01-07 21:02 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? Rosario193 <Rosario@invalid.invalid> - 2015-01-08 11:22 +0100
Re: Is this poor style? Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2015-01-08 11:33 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? Rosario193 <Rosario@invalid.invalid> - 2015-01-08 13:08 +0100
Re: Is this poor style? Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2015-01-08 12:54 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-01-08 14:04 +0100
Re: Is this poor style? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-01-07 13:57 -0800
Re: Is this poor style? Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2015-01-07 18:12 -0600
Re: Is this poor style? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-01-07 20:56 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2015-01-07 21:18 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-01-07 21:28 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-01-06 11:28 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-01-07 20:19 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-01-07 16:05 -0800
Re: Is this poor style? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-01-08 08:29 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-01-12 22:08 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-03-24 20:35 -0700
Re: Is this poor style? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-03-25 08:43 -0700
Re: Is this poor style? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-03-25 16:38 -0700
Re: Is this poor style? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-03-26 15:43 -0500
Re: Is this poor style? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-03-28 08:57 -0700
Re: Is this poor style? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-01-08 13:23 +1300
Re: Is this poor style? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-01-07 16:53 -0800
Re: Is this poor style? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-01-08 14:11 +1300
Re: Is this poor style? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-01-08 11:10 +1300
Re: Is this poor style? John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2015-01-05 15:54 -0800
Re: Is this poor style? Rosario193 <Rosario@invalid.invalid> - 2015-01-06 11:03 +0100
Re: Is this poor style? Rosario193 <Rosario@invalid.invalid> - 2015-01-06 11:10 +0100
Re: Is this poor style? John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2015-01-06 06:03 -0800
Re: Is this poor style? Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2015-01-06 14:44 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-01-06 09:10 -0600
Re: Is this poor style? Rosario193 <Rosario@invalid.invalid> - 2015-01-08 11:14 +0100
Re: Is this poor style? Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2015-01-08 11:31 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? Rosario193 <Rosario@invalid.invalid> - 2015-01-08 13:06 +0100
Re: Is this poor style? Rosario193 <Rosario@invalid.invalid> - 2015-01-08 13:19 +0100
Re: Is this poor style? Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2015-01-08 12:53 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-01-08 05:49 -0800
Re: Is this poor style? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-01-08 08:18 -0800
Re: Is this poor style? Rosario193 <Rosario@invalid.invalid> - 2015-01-09 07:58 +0100
Re: Is this poor style? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-03-24 09:28 -0700
Re: Is this poor style? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-03-24 13:57 -0700
Re: Is this poor style? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-03-25 08:28 -0700
Re: Is this poor style? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-03-25 12:17 -0700
Re: Is this poor style? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2015-04-05 17:03 -0700
Re: Is this poor style? John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2015-01-14 11:25 -0800
Re: Is this poor style? Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2015-01-14 19:41 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? Rosario193 <Rosario@invalid.invalid> - 2015-01-15 09:01 +0100
Re: Is this poor style? Rosario193 <Rosario@invalid.invalid> - 2015-01-15 09:35 +0100
Re: Is this poor style? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-01-04 11:15 -0500
Re: Is this poor style? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-01-04 21:38 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? Dr Nick <nospam-4@temporary-address.org.uk> - 2015-01-05 07:27 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-01-05 06:33 -0800
Re: Is this poor style? Vincenzo Mercuri <nomail@yahoo.it> - 2015-01-04 18:56 +0100
Re: Is this poor style? rouben@shady.(none) (Rouben Rostamian) - 2015-01-04 18:22 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-01-04 21:35 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-01-05 10:46 +1300
Re: Is this poor style? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-01-04 15:36 -0800
Re: Is this poor style? asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2015-01-05 12:05 -0800
Re: Is this poor style? asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2015-01-05 14:18 -0800
Re: Is this poor style? asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2015-01-05 14:32 -0800
Re: Is this poor style? asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2015-01-05 14:37 -0800
Re: Is this poor style? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-01-05 18:23 -0500
Re: Is this poor style? Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2015-01-05 23:32 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-01-05 15:31 -0800
Re: Is this poor style? Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> - 2015-01-13 15:00 +0200
Re: Is this poor style? Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2015-01-04 15:07 -0600
Re: Is this poor style? jadill33@gmail.com - 2015-01-05 15:03 -0800
Re: Is this poor style? buja <buja66@gmail.com> - 2015-01-06 21:48 +0100
Re: Is this poor style? Rosario193 <Rosario@invalid.invalid> - 2015-01-08 11:21 +0100
Re: Is this poor style? buja <buja66@gmail.com> - 2015-01-08 12:42 +0100
Re: Is this poor style? "S.K.R. de Jong" <SKRdJ@nowhere.net> - 2015-01-08 15:29 +0000
Re: Is this poor style? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-01-08 12:03 -0500
csiph-web