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


Groups > comp.lang.c > #106008

Re: va_start without the first argument?

From David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>
Newsgroups comp.lang.c
Subject Re: va_start without the first argument?
Date 2017-03-14 13:46 +0100
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <oa8oid$ktt$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References (15 earlier) <oa4n2f$nq6$1@dont-email.me> <a6aade9b-b090-4e38-a131-11f15f25261c@googlegroups.com> <oa6m89$e06$1@dont-email.me> <oa71q1$snq$1@dont-email.me> <oa77et$gq6$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw


On 13/03/17 23:48, BartC wrote:
> On 13/03/2017 21:12, David Brown wrote:
>> On 13/03/17 18:54, BartC wrote:
>>
>>> (Just yesterday, I had to need to wait a second or so before proceeding
>>> in a bit of code. I couldn't just use a loop counting to a billion, as
>>> this was gcc on Linux (so no alternatives), and it would just disregard
>>> the loop. Things such as sleep() were not practical, I ended up using
>>> getchar() then waiting for someone to press Enter.
>>>
>>> It gets silly when you have to fight the compiler to stop it ignoring
>>> your intentions.)
>>>
>>
>> <http://en.cppreference.com/w/c/language/volatile>
>>
>> It gets silly when you complain about how many problems you have with a
>> compiler when you simply need to learn the language you are using.
>> Failing that, learn to use Google - you would have found the answer
>> pretty quickly.
> 
> I know about 'volatile' but it is one of the ways that you have to
> battle the compiler.

Personally, I consider it "working /with/ the compiler", not "battling"
it.  But then, I don't view gcc as evil, nor do I feel the need to find
new ways to make it appear bad so that I can persuade myself that my own
toy compiler is better.

> I'm sure that wasn't its original purpose, to
> to persuade the compiler that 'this bit of code really does do something
> useful guv, honest!' /You're/ the one who should be calling the shots.

The programmer /is/ the one calling the shots - but they need to be
called in the C language.  In C, an empty loop does nothing - the
compiler knows that, and the programmer should know that.  volatile
accesses exist explicitly to create "side effects" - they can be used to
make the otherwise empty loop /do/ something.

> 
> With a more elaborate bit of code, how can you even be sure that
> 'volatile' takes care of all the possible ways in a which a compiler
> could sneakily avoid running a crucial or significant bit of code?

Basically, it's called "knowing what I am doing".  Compilers are not
sneaky - they follow rules.  /Programmers/ are sometimes sneaky - and a
key point in writing correct code is not to out-smart yourself.

> 
> You also don't want mess around cluttering up code for might be a
> temporary test.

Your code here exists /only/ for a temporary test!  Or do you think an
empty loop like this is a sensible idea in PC code?

> 
> (Besides, this C code was was auto-generated from my language where the
> 'volatile' attribute doesn't exist; it is an artefact only of the C
> language.

You mean your language is to limited?

> 
> My language tends to do what the programmer tells it to. Well until that
> aim is undermined when is has to make use of intermediate C code.)

You mean your translator is broken?  Your language attempts to give
guarantees about what it will do with the program code it is given, but
the C code it generates does not provide that guarantee.  This is not a
fault of C, or the compiler - it is the fault of the person writing the
translator.

> 
> (For all its capabilities, on my current project [and at its current
> stage], gcc -O3 used for my generated C, only gives me 15% better
> performance than my compiler's own native code output, despite the
> latter's code generation being rubbish. And I admit that myself. [When
> both target x64])
> 
> 

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

va_start without the first argument? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-03-10 11:57 -0800
  Re: va_start without the first argument? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-03-10 12:04 -0800
  Re: va_start without the first argument? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-03-10 12:32 -0800
    Re: va_start without the first argument? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-03-10 15:51 -0500
    Re: va_start without the first argument? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-03-10 14:36 -0800
      Re: va_start without the first argument? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-03-10 14:53 -0800
        Re: va_start without the first argument? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-10 17:14 -0600
          Re: va_start without the first argument? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-03-10 15:37 -0800
            Re: va_start without the first argument? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-10 23:12 -0600
              Re: va_start without the first argument? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 10:29 -0700
                Re: va_start without the first argument? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 11:31 -0700
                Re: va_start without the first argument? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-03-13 18:40 +0000
                Re: va_start without the first argument? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 12:31 -0700
            Re: va_start without the first argument? jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2017-03-11 19:53 +0100
              Re: va_start without the first argument? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-03-11 19:05 +0000
                Re: va_start without the first argument? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-03-11 11:56 -0800
              Re: va_start without the first argument? antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2017-03-12 05:41 +0000
              Re: va_start without the first argument? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-12 13:52 +0100
                Re: va_start without the first argument? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-03-12 14:40 +0000
                Re: va_start without the first argument? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-12 18:13 +0100
                Re: va_start without the first argument? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-03-12 18:04 +0000
                Re: va_start without the first argument? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-12 21:04 +0100
                Re: va_start without the first argument? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-03-12 21:02 +0000
                Re: va_start without the first argument? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-12 22:40 +0100
                Re: va_start without the first argument? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-03-12 15:51 -0700
                Re: va_start without the first argument? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2017-03-12 16:52 -0700
                Re: va_start without the first argument? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-13 00:56 +0100
                Re: va_start without the first argument? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-03-13 09:17 -0700
                Re: va_start without the first argument? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-03-13 17:54 +0000
                Re: va_start without the first argument? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-13 22:12 +0100
                Re: va_start without the first argument? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-03-13 22:48 +0000
                Re: va_start without the first argument? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-14 13:46 +0100
                Re: va_start without the first argument? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-03-14 13:37 +0000
                Re: va_start without the first argument? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-14 15:24 +0100
                Re: va_start without the first argument? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-03-14 08:25 -0700
                Re: va_start without the first argument? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-14 17:02 +0100
                Re: va_start without the first argument? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-03-14 09:45 -0700
                Re: va_start without the first argument? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-03-14 09:15 -0700
                Re: va_start without the first argument? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-03-14 10:02 -0700
                Re: va_start without the first argument? jt@toerring.de (Jens Thoms Toerring) - 2017-03-14 20:32 +0000
                Re: va_start without the first argument? raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2017-03-14 07:44 +0000
                Re: va_start without the first argument? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-14 13:38 +0100
                Re: va_start without the first argument? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-03-14 08:57 -0700
                Re: va_start without the first argument? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-03-13 11:21 -0700
                Re: va_start without the first argument? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-03-13 18:33 +0000
                Re: va_start without the first argument? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-13 22:08 +0100
                Re: va_start without the first argument? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-03-13 15:23 -0700
                Re: va_start without the first argument? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-14 13:58 +0100
                Re: va_start without the first argument? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-03-14 09:18 -0700
                Re: va_start without the first argument? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-03-14 16:52 +0000
                Re: va_start without the first argument? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-03-14 11:34 -0700
                Re: va_start without the first argument? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-03-14 18:54 +0000
                Re: va_start without the first argument? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-03-14 13:30 -0700
                Re: va_start without the first argument? Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2017-03-15 21:55 +0000
                Re: va_start without the first argument? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-03-15 15:16 -0700
                Re: va_start without the first argument? Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2017-03-23 21:04 -0700
                Re: va_start without the first argument? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-14 21:48 +0100
                Re: va_start without the first argument? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-03-14 14:01 +0000
                Re: va_start without the first argument? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-03-14 07:42 -0700
                Re: va_start without the first argument? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-03-14 12:38 +0000
                Re: va_start without the first argument? jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2017-03-13 01:11 +0100
                Re: va_start without the first argument? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-13 15:43 +1300
                Re: va_start without the first argument? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-03-13 10:36 +0000
                Re: va_start without the first argument? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-14 07:33 +1300
                Re: va_start without the first argument? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-03-13 19:00 +0000
                Re: va_start without the first argument? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-14 08:05 +1300
                Re: va_start without the first argument? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-03-13 23:10 +0000
                Re: va_start without the first argument? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-14 17:38 +1300
                Re: va_start without the first argument? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 05:48 -0700
                Re: va_start without the first argument? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 12:12 -0700
                Re: va_start without the first argument? jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2017-03-12 19:39 +0100
  Re: va_start without the first argument? jt@toerring.de (Jens Thoms Toerring) - 2017-03-10 20:49 +0000
    Re: va_start without the first argument? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-03-10 14:41 -0800
      Re: va_start without the first argument? John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2017-03-10 16:05 -0800
        Re: va_start without the first argument? jacob navia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2017-03-11 21:47 +0100
          Re: va_start without the first argument? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-03-11 13:07 -0800
            Re: va_start without the first argument? jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2017-03-11 22:24 +0100
              Re: va_start without the first argument? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 05:44 -0700
                Re: va_start without the first argument? Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-03-13 08:59 -0400
                Re: va_start without the first argument? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 06:17 -0700
                Re: va_start without the first argument? Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-03-13 13:27 -0400
                Re: va_start without the first argument? Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-03-13 13:30 -0400
                Re: va_start without the first argument? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 11:00 -0700
                Re: va_start without the first argument? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 10:34 -0700
          Re: va_start without the first argument? antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2017-03-12 06:00 +0000
          Re: va_start without the first argument? gordonb.gas5o@burditt.org (Gordon Burditt) - 2017-03-17 09:46 -0500
            Re: va_start without the first argument? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-03-17 09:07 -0700
        Re: va_start without the first argument? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 05:39 -0700
          Re: va_start without the first argument? John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 11:40 -0700
            Re: va_start without the first argument? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 12:01 -0700
              Re: va_start without the first argument? jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2017-03-13 23:17 +0100
                Re: va_start without the first argument? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 16:15 -0700
                Re: va_start without the first argument? jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2017-03-14 00:26 +0100
                Re: va_start without the first argument? kikiins@gmail.com - 2017-03-13 16:51 -0700
                Re: va_start without the first argument? jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2017-03-14 01:12 +0100
                Re: va_start without the first argument? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 18:24 -0700
                Re: va_start without the first argument? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 18:57 -0700
                Re: va_start without the first argument? raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2017-03-14 07:59 +0000
                Re: va_start without the first argument? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 06:45 -0700
                Re: va_start without the first argument? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-13 18:20 -0500
                Re: va_start without the first argument? jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2017-03-14 00:31 +0100
    Re: va_start without the first argument? raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2017-03-13 16:51 +0000
  Re: va_start without the first argument? jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2017-03-11 19:29 +0100
  Re: va_start without the first argument? Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-11 12:12 -0800
  Re: va_start without the first argument? luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 05:37 -0700
    Re: va_start without the first argument? luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-15 11:45 -0700
      Re: va_start without the first argument? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-03-15 13:39 -0700

csiph-web