Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > alt.os.development > #8366

Re: Smaller C

From "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com>
Newsgroups alt.os.development
Subject Re: Smaller C
Date 2015-07-14 09:08 +0100
Organization Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID <mo2g2d$53h$1@speranza.aioe.org> (permalink)
References (14 earlier) <39da71f8-7e21-4fcb-84da-263d5c81059f@googlegroups.com> <op.x1nizmxyyfako5@localhost> <mnuak9$f21$1@dont-email.me> <mo02q5$i3g$1@speranza.aioe.org> <op.x1qtwod5yfako5@localhost>

Show all headers | View raw


"Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> wrote in message
news:op.x1qtwod5yfako5@localhost...
> On Mon, 13 Jul 2015 06:10:14 -0400, James Harris
> <james.harris.1@gmail.com> wrote:

>> As stdin, stdout and stderr are pointers that it should be possible
>> to change
>
> ...
>
>> I don't see how they can be constants, at least in a conforming
>> implementation.
>
> Most C implementations treat them as constants.  GCC is non-standard
> here.  GCC argues that the C specification doesn't require static
> pointers for stdin, stdout, stderr.  Apparently, they do this to
> allow GCC to reassign streams, e.g., pipes.

The C89 draft that I have says: "The primary use of the freopen function
is to change the file associated with a standard text stream ( stderr ,
stdin , or stdout ), as those identifiers need not be modifiable lvalues
to which the value returned by the fopen function may be assigned."

So you may not be able to say

  stdout = open("prog.c", "r");

but you can say

  freopen("prog.c", "r", stdout);

>> I have been looking at freopen() and it is a bit of a weird one. The
>> signature is
>>
>>   FILE *freopen(const char *path, const char *mode, FILE *stream);
>>
>> The path and the mode are as in the fopen call but note that freopen
>> has *two* file pointers.
>
> It really has only *one* file pointer ...
>
> According to H&S, not the C specifications, the return file pointer
> must be either the passed file pointer 'stream' or NULL for failure.
> I.e., FILE *stream is passed back as the return FILE * unless it needs
> to be set to NULL for failure.

OK.

> freopen() fclose's stream, fopen's path/mode, associates path/mode
> with stream instead of using a new file pointer.

So 'stream' points to the same FILE struct and it is the FILE struct
that has somehow been changed rather than the pointer? That would make
sense in isolation but it would screw up any other FILE pointer which
pointed to the same struct. If it helps to visualise a FILE struct there
is a sample at

  http://www.c4learn.com/c-programming/c-file-structure-and-file-pointer/

It is as follows.

typedef struct
{
 short level ;
 short token ;
 short bsize ;
 char fd ;
 unsigned flags ;
 unsigned char hold ;
 unsigned char *buffer ;
 unsigned char * curp ;
 unsigned istemp;
}FILE ;

If the pointer is to be unchanged then the FILE struct that it points to
has to change - perhaps by changing the fd field, above, and others -
and, as I was saying, there could be another pointer to the same struct
which would also find that its associated file had changed. It would
seem better for freopen to allow the pointer to change as

  freopen(fname, mode, &stdout);

where the & allows the *pointer* to change rather than the FILE struct.

The freopen call may be a macro which does prepend an ampersand. I
cannot see how it could change the pointer otherwise.

>> After some digging I think that the parameter FILE* is the stream 
>> that
>> should be reopened (repointed, if you like).
>
> Yes.
>
>> The return FILE* is only specified to be a FILE pointer
>
> ... and will be either 'stream' or NULL.  See above.
>
>> "Upon  successful  completion  fopen(),  fdopen()  and  freopen() 
>> return
>> a FILE pointer"
>>
>> But it doesn't say what file it will point at.
>
> For fopen(), it will be the newly opened file ... or NULL.
>
> For freopen(), it will be the path/mode you passed, using the original
> 'stream' file pointer, or it'll return NULL for failure.
>
> fdopen() must be POSIX or Linux.
>
>> I can only guess that the
>> freopen call changes the parameter FILE pointer in some way and also
>> returns it the new value. The return is possibly there just to 
>> indicate
>> success (or failure if NULL).
>
> Changes?

Yes. Detail both above and below.

>> A valid call, then, might be
>>
>>   if (freopen("prog.c", "r", stdin)) ....
>>
>> I still don't understand how that can change stdin unless freopen is 
>> a
>> macro. But it's not important. It is something I may never use.
>
> Why would there need to be any change? ...

Well, stdin is a pointer. It points to a FILE struct. AIUI if it points
to the standard-in FILE struct before the call then I thought the
purpose of the call was to get it to point to a different FILE struct.
So it would have to change.

James

Back to alt.os.development | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Re: Smaller C "Alexei A. Frounze" <alexfrunews@gmail.com> - 2015-07-11 20:39 -0700
  Re: Smaller C "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-07-12 04:24 -0400
    Re: Smaller C "Alexei A. Frounze" <alexfrunews@gmail.com> - 2015-07-12 03:17 -0700
      Re: Smaller C "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-07-13 03:28 -0400
    Re: Smaller C "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-07-12 19:12 +0100
      Re: Smaller C "Alexei A. Frounze" <alexfrunews@gmail.com> - 2015-07-12 17:09 -0700
      Re: Smaller C "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-07-13 11:10 +0100
        Re: Smaller C "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-07-13 23:13 -0400
          Re: Smaller C "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-07-14 09:08 +0100
            Re: Smaller C "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-07-15 02:23 -0400
  Re: Smaller C "Alexei A. Frounze" <alexfrunews@gmail.com> - 2015-08-15 02:12 -0700
    Re: Smaller C "Alexei A. Frounze" <alexfrunews@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 15:54 -0700
      Re: Smaller C "Benjamin David Lunt" <zfysz@fysnet.net> - 2015-09-07 12:19 -0700
        Re: Smaller C "Alexei A. Frounze" <alexfrunews@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 13:30 -0700
          Re: Smaller C "Benjamin David Lunt" <zfysz@fysnet.net> - 2015-09-09 19:38 -0700
            Re: Smaller C "Benjamin David Lunt" <zfysz@fysnet.net> - 2015-09-09 19:49 -0700
            Re: Smaller C "Benjamin David Lunt" <zfysz@fysnet.net> - 2015-09-09 20:58 -0700
            Re: Smaller C "Alexei A. Frounze" <alexfrunews@gmail.com> - 2015-09-10 01:45 -0700
              Re: Smaller C "Benjamin David Lunt" <zfysz@fysnet.net> - 2015-09-10 10:45 -0700
                Re: Smaller C "Alexei A. Frounze" <alexfrunews@gmail.com> - 2015-09-10 23:20 -0700
                Re: Smaller C "wolfgang kern" <nowhere@never.at> - 2015-09-11 09:26 +0200
                Re: Smaller C "wolfgang kern" <nowhere@never.at> - 2015-09-11 09:50 +0200
                Re: Smaller C "Alexei A. Frounze" <alexfrunews@gmail.com> - 2015-09-11 00:58 -0700
                Re: Smaller C "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-09-11 17:38 -0400
                Re: Smaller C "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-11 23:39 +0100
                Re: Smaller C "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-09-11 19:39 -0400
                Re: Smaller C "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-12 11:22 +0100
                Re: Smaller C "Alexei A. Frounze" <alexfrunews@gmail.com> - 2015-09-12 02:21 -0700
                Re: Smaller C "wolfgang kern" <nowhere@never.at> - 2015-09-12 21:53 +0200
                Re: Smaller C "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-09-13 03:37 -0400
                Re: Smaller C "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-13 09:49 +0100
                Re: Smaller C "wolfgang kern" <nowhere@never.at> - 2015-09-13 12:58 +0200
                Re: Smaller C "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-09-13 07:32 -0400
                Re: Smaller C "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-13 19:05 +0100
                Re: Smaller C "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 13:19 +0100
                Re: Smaller C "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-09-15 00:01 -0400
                Re: Smaller C "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-18 14:48 +0100
                Re: Smaller C "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-09-26 16:23 -0400
                Re: Smaller C James Harris <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-27 00:23 +0100
                Re: Smaller C "Alexei A. Frounze" <alexfrunews@gmail.com> - 2015-09-26 16:37 -0700
                Re: Smaller C "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-09-27 10:17 -0400
                Re: Smaller C "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-09-27 10:24 -0400
                Re: Smaller C "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-09-27 10:46 -0400
                Re: Smaller C James Harris <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2016-01-16 16:14 +0000
                Re: Smaller C Rod Pemberton <NoHaveNotOne@bcczxcfre.cmm> - 2016-01-23 13:20 -0500
                Re: Smaller C James Harris <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2016-01-27 13:52 +0000
                Re: Smaller C "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-09-27 10:28 -0400
                Re: Smaller C James Harris <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2016-01-16 16:31 +0000
                Re: Smaller C Rod Pemberton <NoHaveNotOne@bcczxcfre.cmm> - 2016-01-23 13:20 -0500
                Re: Smaller C "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-18 16:21 +0100
                Re: Smaller C "Alexei A. Frounze" <alexfrunews@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 17:25 -0700
                Re: Smaller C "wolfgang kern" <nowhere@never.at> - 2015-09-13 12:43 +0200
                Re: Smaller C "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-13 09:21 +0100
                Re: Smaller C "wolfgang kern" <nowhere@never.at> - 2015-09-13 13:02 +0200
                Re: Smaller C "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-13 19:09 +0100
                Re: Smaller C "Benjamin David Lunt" <zfysz@fysnet.net> - 2015-09-11 13:32 -0700
                Re: Smaller C "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-09-11 18:51 -0400
                Re: Smaller C "Benjamin David Lunt" <zfysz@fysnet.net> - 2015-09-11 18:16 -0700
                Re: Smaller C "Alexei A. Frounze" <alexfrunews@gmail.com> - 2015-09-12 02:36 -0700
                Re: Smaller C "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-12 11:56 +0100
                Re: Smaller C "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-09-13 03:45 -0400
                Re: Smaller C "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-13 10:28 +0100
                Re: Smaller C "Alexei A. Frounze" <alexfrunews@gmail.com> - 2015-09-13 02:53 -0700
                Re: Smaller C "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-09-13 11:17 -0400
                Re: Smaller C "Alexei A. Frounze" <alexfrunews@gmail.com> - 2015-09-13 16:54 -0700
                Re: Smaller C "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-09-13 21:39 -0400
                Re: Smaller C "Alexei A. Frounze" <alexfrunews@gmail.com> - 2015-09-13 20:31 -0700
                Re: Smaller C "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-09-13 09:03 -0400
                Re: Smaller C "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-13 19:48 +0100
                Re: Smaller C "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-09-13 21:33 -0400
                Re: Smaller C "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 23:17 +0100
                Re: Smaller C "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-09-20 17:37 -0400
                Re: Smaller C "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 23:46 +0100
  Re: Smaller C "Benjamin David Lunt" <zfysz@fysnet.net> - 2015-09-11 21:37 -0700
    Re: Smaller C "Benjamin David Lunt" <zfysz@fysnet.net> - 2015-09-11 22:29 -0700
      Re: Smaller C "Alexei A. Frounze" <alexfrunews@gmail.com> - 2015-09-12 03:25 -0700
        Re: Smaller C "Benjamin David Lunt" <zfysz@fysnet.net> - 2015-09-12 11:18 -0700
          Re: Smaller C "Benjamin David Lunt" <zfysz@fysnet.net> - 2015-09-12 11:39 -0700
          Re: Smaller C "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-09-13 03:47 -0400
            Re: Smaller C "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-09-13 11:31 -0400
          Re: Smaller C "Alexei A. Frounze" <alexfrunews@gmail.com> - 2015-09-13 02:00 -0700
            Re: Smaller C "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-09-13 11:31 -0400
            Re: Smaller C "Benjamin David Lunt" <zfysz@fysnet.net> - 2015-09-13 09:15 -0700
    Re: Smaller C "Alexei A. Frounze" <alexfrunews@gmail.com> - 2015-09-12 02:45 -0700
      Re: Smaller C "Benjamin David Lunt" <zfysz@fysnet.net> - 2015-09-12 10:55 -0700
  Re: Smaller C "Benjamin David Lunt" <zfysz@fysnet.net> - 2015-09-15 19:23 -0700
    Re: Smaller C "Alexei A. Frounze" <alexfrunews@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 03:03 -0700
      Re: Smaller C "Benjamin David Lunt" <zfysz@fysnet.net> - 2015-09-16 10:17 -0700

csiph-web