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

Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #84197

Re: Function pointer size (was Re: nullptr is not 0)

Show all headers | View raw

On 5/19/2022 10:45 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
> 
> Look at an actual layout of a class
> 
> Since struct A has a virtual function in it, the class needs a vtable, 
> so the layout of A will be something like:
> 
> 
> struct A:
>      VTable* vtbl = vtable_A;  // this gets filled in by the constructor.
> ...rest of the data in A
> 
> vtable_a:
>      void (*vtbl_A_bar)(A*);        // filled in by loader to point to 
> the implementation of A::bar
> 
> 
> struct B:
>      VTable* vtbl = vtable_B;    // this gets filled in by the constructor
> 
> ...rest of data in A
> ...rest of data in B
> 
> 
> vtable_b:
>      void (*vtbl_B_bar)(A*);        // filled in by loader to point to 
> the implementation of B::bar
> 
> 
> &A::foo results in a pointer that says it is a "normal" pointer, and the 
> address of A::foo;
> 
> &A::bar resutls in a pointer that says it is a "Virtual" pointer to the 
> first element of the vtable (which will point to A::bar in an A object 
> and B::bar in a B object)

You keep describing GCC's implementation. I've already described this in 
great detail previously. You are just repeating my previous explanations.

For what reason?

> There needs to be a bit when we evalute o.*f so it knows if f is storing 
> the actual address of the function or the offset into the vtable.

Well, of course, if you follow GCC's approach, then yes, you need a bit, 
since GCC's approach is based on that extra bit.

But you don't have to use GCC's approach. Take MSVC's approach, which 
does not need any extra bits. In MSVC's approach pointers never store 
"offset into the vtable".

So, what point are you trying to make? So far I see only a tautology: 
"if you use a approach that need an extra bit, then you need an extra 
bit". Well, duh... And?

-- 
Best regards,
Andrey

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

Thread

nullptr is not 0 Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2022-05-08 09:45 -0400
  Re: nullptr is not 0 "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach@gmail.com> - 2022-05-08 16:21 +0200
  Re: nullptr is not 0 Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2022-05-08 10:00 -0700
  Re: nullptr is not 0 Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-05-09 06:38 +0200
  Re: nullptr is not 0 Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-05-09 05:06 +0000
    Re: nullptr is not 0 Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2022-05-09 21:46 +0100
      Re: nullptr is not 0 Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2022-05-09 13:57 -0700
        Re: nullptr is not 0 Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-05-10 05:04 +0000
          Re: nullptr is not 0 Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2022-05-09 22:33 -0700
      Re: nullptr is not 0 scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-05-09 21:56 +0000
        Function pointer size (was Re: nullptr is not 0) Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2022-05-17 21:30 +0100
          Re: Function pointer size (was Re: nullptr is not 0) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-05-17 21:00 +0000
            Re: Function pointer size (was Re: nullptr is not 0) Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2022-05-19 21:52 +0100
            Re: Function pointer size (was Re: nullptr is not 0) Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2022-05-19 14:08 -0700
          Re: Function pointer size (was Re: nullptr is not 0) Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2022-05-17 17:05 -0700
          Re: Function pointer size (was Re: nullptr is not 0) Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-05-18 04:46 +0000
            Re: Function pointer size (was Re: nullptr is not 0) Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2022-05-18 02:14 -0700
              Re: Function pointer size (was Re: nullptr is not 0) Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-05-19 14:53 +0000
                Re: Function pointer size (was Re: nullptr is not 0) "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach@gmail.com> - 2022-05-19 17:19 +0200
                Re: Function pointer size (was Re: nullptr is not 0) Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2022-05-19 10:14 -0700
                Re: Function pointer size (was Re: nullptr is not 0) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-19 13:45 -0400
                Re: Function pointer size (was Re: nullptr is not 0) Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2022-05-19 11:31 -0700
                Re: Function pointer size (was Re: nullptr is not 0) Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-05-20 06:58 +0000
                Re: Function pointer size (was Re: nullptr is not 0) Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2022-05-20 00:11 -0700
                Re: Function pointer size (was Re: nullptr is not 0) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-19 12:27 -0400
                Re: Function pointer size (was Re: nullptr is not 0) Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2022-05-19 09:47 -0700
                Re: Function pointer size (was Re: nullptr is not 0) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-19 13:36 -0400
                Re: Function pointer size (was Re: nullptr is not 0) Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2022-05-19 11:24 -0700
                Re: Function pointer size (was Re: nullptr is not 0) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-19 21:32 -0400
                Re: Function pointer size (was Re: nullptr is not 0) Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2022-05-19 20:28 -0700
                Re: Function pointer size (was Re: nullptr is not 0) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-20 10:57 -0400
                Re: Function pointer size (was Re: nullptr is not 0) Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2022-05-19 09:35 -0700
                Re: Function pointer size (was Re: nullptr is not 0) Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2022-05-19 10:10 -0700
                Re: Function pointer size (was Re: nullptr is not 0) Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-05-20 07:15 +0000
          Re: Function pointer size (was Re: nullptr is not 0) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-05-18 11:50 -0700
            Re: Function pointer size (was Re: nullptr is not 0) Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2022-05-18 15:46 -0700
              Re: Function pointer size (was Re: nullptr is not 0) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-05-19 20:52 -0700

csiph-web