Re: Non-constant initializers

From	Fred the Freshwater Catfish <usenet.fred@bdtd.invalid>
Newsgroups	comp.arch, comp.lang.c
Subject	Re: Non-constant initializers
Date	2011-05-14 17:14 +0000
Organization	Bottomfeeder Technical Consulting spa
Message-ID	<s0IQvN.Gi2.VZav4@btdt.invalid> (permalink)
References	(5 earlier) <lniptfiiic.fsf@nuthaus.mib.org> <yemBS9.FUV.7wkYM@btdt.invalid> <4dcde0cd$0$24911$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au> <chine.bleu-5E3613.01071714052011@reserved-multicast-range-not-delegated.example.com> <4dce49d3$0$13390$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 09:22:27AM +0000, kym@kymhorsell.com wrote:
> In comp.arch Columbus sailed the ocean China Blue <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > In article <4dcde0cd$0$24911$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>, kym@kymhorsell.com 
> > wrote:
> >> In comp.arch Fred the Freshwater Catfish <usenet.fred@bdtd.invalid> wrote:
> >> ...
> >> > That's a pretty good idea, but I was looking for something convenient
> >> > to set-up global-scope variables in a library.  No big deal, but I
> >> > thought I could be clever about it.
> >> On some platforms its the linker that's responsible for once-only
> >> runtime initialisations. If you name a routine in a special way,
> >> or make sure it's in a code segment with a special name, the linker
> >> sets up code to ensure the code gets called before main(). No need
> >> for static "has it been done yet" variables or explicit calls.
> >> This is how gnu C++ compilers typically arrange for global initialisations.
> >> Unlike the idea of calling C++ from C (which usually won't work), just
> >> hanging off this hook generally does work -- if you can find the 
> >> documentation.
> > Unfortunately this solution is not guaranteed to be available on all platforms.
> 
> That's the agreed meaning of "on some platforms", yes.


Yeah.  I know gcc supports constructor and destructor function
attributes, with some sort of "priority" ranking, but I haven't fooled
with it enough to make it work.  I don't know how other compilers fare
in this respect, but it seems like the kind feature that gets
implemented differently by each compiler.  I might end up using
zero-length arrays in structure definitions if I find it's popular
enough, but I'm really trying not to make my application require weird
stuff just to compile, or in fact to tie my application to gcc.



Fred the Freshwater Catfish

Thread

Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2011-05-07 03:06 -0400
  Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-07 09:44 +0100
    Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2011-05-07 11:38 +0100
      Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-07 12:21 +0100
        Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2011-05-07 13:47 +0100
          Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-05-07 09:55 -0700
            Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2011-05-07 19:27 +0100
              Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-05-07 13:54 -0700
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2011-05-09 13:38 -0400
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com> - 2011-05-10 12:40 -0400
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2011-05-10 20:32 +0200
            Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring torbenm@diku.dk (Torben Ægidius Mogensen) - 2011-05-09 13:42 +0200
    Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-05-07 04:26 -0700
      Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-07 12:13 +0100
  Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-07 14:59 -0700
    Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2011-05-09 14:14 -0400
      Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-09 20:38 +0100
      Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-09 13:55 -0700
        Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-10 09:05 +0100
          Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Jason Riedy <jason@lovesgoodfood.com> - 2011-05-10 13:24 -0400
            Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-10 18:41 +0100
            Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-11 13:56 -0700
            Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-11 14:04 -0700
            Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-11 14:06 -0700
          Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-11 13:55 -0700
            Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-11 22:15 +0100
              Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2011-05-12 20:52 +0100
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-12 20:20 +0100
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-05-12 14:55 -0700
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2011-05-13 12:25 +0200
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-13 11:18 +0100
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-14 13:19 -0700
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-05-14 19:11 -0700
              Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-12 20:08 -0700
            Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Jason Riedy <jason@lovesgoodfood.com> - 2011-05-12 23:54 -0400
        Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2011-05-12 01:08 -0400
          Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-12 09:27 +0100
            Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-05-12 05:41 -0700
              Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-12 13:22 +0100
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-05-12 07:22 -0700
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-12 14:58 +0100
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2011-05-12 09:23 -0700
                Non-constant initializers Fred the Freshwater Catfish <usenet.fred@bdtd.invalid> - 2011-05-12 22:59 +0000
                Re: Non-constant initializers Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-13 11:07 +1200
                Re: Non-constant initializers Fred the Freshwater Catfish <usenet.fred@bdtd.invalid> - 2011-05-12 23:17 +0000
                Re: Non-constant initializers Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-13 11:20 +1200
                Re: Non-constant initializers Fred the Freshwater Catfish <usenet.fred@bdtd.invalid> - 2011-05-12 23:30 +0000
                Re: Non-constant initializers Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-13 11:34 +1200
                Re: Non-constant initializers Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-05-12 16:52 -0700
                Re: Non-constant initializers Fred the Freshwater Catfish <usenet.fred@bdtd.invalid> - 2011-05-14 00:13 +0000
                Re: Non-constant initializers kym@kymhorsell.com - 2011-05-14 01:54 +0000
                Re: Non-constant initializers Columbus sailed the ocean China Blue <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2011-05-14 01:07 -0700
                Re: Non-constant initializers kym@kymhorsell.com - 2011-05-14 09:22 +0000
                Re: Non-constant initializers Fred the Freshwater Catfish <usenet.fred@bdtd.invalid> - 2011-05-14 17:14 +0000
                Re: Non-constant initializers Fred the Freshwater Catfish <usenet.fred@bdtd.invalid> - 2011-05-14 00:11 +0000
                Re: Non-constant initializers Columbus sailed the ocean China Blue <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2011-05-12 16:15 -0700
                Re: Non-constant initializers Fred the Freshwater Catfish <usenet.fred@bdtd.invalid> - 2011-05-12 23:28 +0000
                Re: Non-constant initializers Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2011-05-12 18:01 -0600
                Re: Non-constant initializers Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-05-12 18:15 -0700
                Re: Non-constant initializers Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2011-05-12 22:56 -0600
                Re: Non-constant initializers Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-05-13 05:18 +0000
                Re: Non-constant initializers Fred the Freshwater Catfish <usenet.fred@bdtd.invalid> - 2011-05-13 23:57 +0000
            Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-12 20:20 -0700
              Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-13 09:48 +0100
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2011-05-13 12:55 +0200
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-13 11:25 +0100
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2011-05-13 08:57 -0700
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-13 16:42 +0100
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2011-05-13 13:17 -0700
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-13 21:03 +0100
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2011-05-14 06:43 +0200
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2011-05-14 06:55 +0100
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Ken Hagan" <k.hagan@thermoteknix.com> - 2011-05-17 12:59 +0100
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-17 12:44 +0100
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2011-05-17 14:07 +0100
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-17 17:20 +0100
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Ken Hagan" <k.hagan@thermoteknix.com> - 2011-05-17 15:03 +0100
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-14 08:43 +0100
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-14 09:17 +0100
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2011-05-14 09:04 -0700
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-14 17:00 -0700
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-14 16:58 -0700
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-05-14 19:07 -0700
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-15 09:40 +0100
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2011-05-16 11:05 +0200
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-05-16 06:44 -0700
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring mac <acolvin@efunct.com> - 2011-05-19 20:17 +0000
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-05-19 15:20 -0700
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2011-05-19 18:51 -0400
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Petter Gustad <newsmailcomp6@gustad.com> - 2011-05-20 08:01 +0200
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-20 15:09 -0700
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2011-05-20 08:54 +0200
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Ken Hagan" <k.hagan@thermoteknix.com> - 2011-05-23 11:11 +0100
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2011-05-23 18:20 -0400
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2011-06-03 08:21 +0200
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2011-05-19 13:31 -0700
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2011-05-16 09:05 -0700
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2011-05-16 22:37 +0200
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2011-05-18 23:16 -0700
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring ChrisQ <meru@devnull.com> - 2011-05-17 17:10 +0100
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2011-05-17 17:27 +0100
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring ChrisQ <meru@devnull.com> - 2011-05-17 23:08 +0100
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Tom <tggzzz@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2011-05-17 22:37 +0000
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-18 09:25 +0100
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-05-18 06:25 -0700
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-18 14:06 +0100
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2011-05-18 19:23 +0100
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-05-18 13:48 -0700
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Andrew Reilly <areilly---@bigpond.net.au> - 2011-05-19 00:29 +0000
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Ken Hagan" <k.hagan@thermoteknix.com> - 2011-05-19 13:12 +0100
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2011-05-18 23:27 -0700
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-05-19 15:19 -0700
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2011-05-20 07:33 -0700
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2011-05-16 03:14 -0700
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-16 10:43 +0100
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2011-05-16 04:58 -0700
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-16 12:40 +0100
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2011-05-15 10:12 -0700
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-14 13:22 -0700
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-15 09:02 +0100
                Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-14 14:02 -0700
          Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-12 20:18 -0700
      Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Robert Myers <rbmyersusa@gmail.com> - 2011-05-09 14:32 -0700
        Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-09 16:08 -0700

csiph-web