Re: Unspecified behavior in C

From	James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c
Subject	Re: Unspecified behavior in C
Date	2015-07-14 12:02 -0400
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<mo3boh$rd8$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	(14 earlier) <bf532be7-e6e0-4871-a28d-36acc24ce3fa@googlegroups.com> <55A3F2EB.5060502@verizon.net> <b6c46dda-cdfa-437f-95d6-81972600030e@googlegroups.com> <55A40C1E.5050706@verizon.net> <670c2040-db68-4dc6-b278-4016684e90d8@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 07/14/2015 11:14 AM, David Kleinecke wrote:
...
> The linking method I am familiar with links nothing but names. The old
> terms are symref and symdef. A symref is an outward (external) link. It
> consists of a name and an address where another potential address is 
> located. A symdef is also a pair of a name and and an address only here
> the address is data. Linking consists of matching pairs of names and
> putting the symdef address in the symref potential address. There also
> is relocation which I have left out to keep things simple.
> 
> This kind of linking is blind to almost everything. All an external
> function reference provides is an address where one is supposed to
> jump. What is at the end of that jump depends. 

Of course. "All declarations that refer to the same object or function
shall have compatible type; otherwise, the behavior is undefined."
(6.2.7p2).  Whenever you have a declaration of identifier with external
linkage in a given module that does not also contain a matching
definition, someone needs to make sure that there is a corresponding
definition in some other module, with a compatible type.  When someone
provides a library, it's the library provider who's responsible for the
accuracy of the declarations in the corresponding header files.

Since the behavior is undefined if they aren't compatible, an
implementation of C has no obligation to identify such mis-matches, and
no obligation to minimize the damage that might be done by them.
Therefore, the type-blind kind of linking you've described is adequate
to meet the requirements of the C standard.

A given implementation of C includes not only the C compiler, but also
the C standard library, the standard headers, and the linker (which
means that it's a misnomer to use "implementation" as a synonym for
"compiler"). It's not uncommon to have implementations where the
compiler, library and linker were provided by three different vendors,
which means that talking about the "implementor" as if it were a single
entity is also sometimes misleading - but it is convenient shorthand.

It's the responsibility of the implementor to ensure that the compiler
interprets the declarations provided by the standard headers as
identifying types for each such identifier that are compatible with the
definitions provided by the standard library.

> This kind of linker pre-dates C and might be assumed by the Standard.
> But as I have obeserved the Standard is vague where it might be precise
> ("All external object and function references are resolved." 5.1.1.2.8)
> so I suspect they had something else in mind - but I am unable see what
> that something else might be.

I don't think so. What you've described is pretty much exactly what I
believe the standard requires to occur during that phase. What makes you
think that the committee had anything else in mind? Keep in mind that
the C committee is not a bunch of idiots who have no idea how things
actually work. A large fraction of them represent actual implementors,
including many of the most important ones - the rest are mostly highly
knowlegble users of real-world implementations. The standard's
description of linkage is supposed to be compatible with how most
real-world linkers actually work - and the committee believes that
they've succeeded in that goal.
Have you, by any chance, misunderstood the C standard as requiring that
implementations diagnose type mismatches? 6.2.7p2 says otherwise.

> Of course, good practice is to have something at the end of a function
> call makes sense. 

"good practice" seems an inadequate description. Is it even possible to
get a working program unless that's the case?
-- 
James Kuyper

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