printf("%p\n", (void *)0); /* UB, or not? Please explain your answer. */
188  17386 
infobahn wrote: printf("%p\n", (void *)0); /* UB, or not? Please explain your answer.
*/
I don't think there is anything in the standard that makes this UB.
You are not dereferencing a NULL pointer (which is UB) and it's the
value of the poitner (address) that is used here.
In article <42************ ***@btinternet. com>,
infobahn <in******@btint ernet.com> wrote:
:printf("%p\n", (void *)0); /* UB, or not? Please explain your answer. */
Depends what you mean by "UB". All that the standard mandates about
%p is that the implimentation will print -something- out, and that
if scanf("%p") is used to read it back in within the same execution
session then the result will compare equal to the original pointer.
-What- is printed is undefined -- it need not even be numeric.
It could print out verses from the Koran... translated into Farsi...
though admittedly you are more likely to get snippets of dialogue
from "Gilligan's Island".
--
Entropy is the logarithm of probability -- Boltzmann
infobahn wrote:
printf("%p\n", (void *)0); /* UB, or not? Please explain your answer. */
UB, due to lack of prototype for printf, and appearing outside of
the body of a function.
--
"If you want to post a followup via groups.google.c om, don't use
the broken "Reply" link at the bottom of the article. Click on
"show options" at the top of the article, then click on the
"Reply" at the bottom of the article headers." - Keith Thompson
infobahn <in******@btint ernet.com> writes: printf("%p\n", (void *)0); /* UB, or not? Please explain your answer. */
Ooh, good catch!
Assuming it appears in a valid context (within a function, and with a
"#include <stdio.h>" in the right place), a strict reading of the
standard could lead to the conclusion that it's undefined behavior.
However, I think it's clear that it's not *intended* to be undefined
behavior, and the standard can (and IMHO should) be read so that it
isn't. (The output is implementation-defined, of course, but that's
not what your asking about.)
C99 7.1.4, "Use of library functions", says:
Each of the following statements applies unless explicitly stated
otherwise in the detailed descriptions that follow: If an argument
to a function has an invalid value (such as a value outside the
domain of the function, or a pointer outside the address space of
the program, or a null pointer, or a pointer to non-modifiable
storage when the corresponding parameter is not const-qualified)
or a type (after promotion) not expected by a function with
variable number of arguments, the behavior is undefined.
C99 7.19.6.1p8, "The fprintf function" (page 279) says:
p The argument shall be a pointer to void. The value of the
pointer is converted to a sequence of printing characters, in
an implementation-defined manner.
Since this doesn't explicitly say that a null pointer is allowed, one
could argue that it's undefined behavior.
The escape clause, I think is that 7.1.4 says "If an argument to a
function has an invalid value (*such as* ... a null pointer ...)". If
I turn my head to one side and squint, I can read this as saying that
a null pointer can be an invalid value, not necessarily that it always
is one.
On the other hand, the same reasoning could imply that strlen(NULL)
doesn't invoke undefined behavior. We have to use common sense to
determine that printf("%p\n", (void*)0)) is ok but strlen(NULL) is not
-- but some people's "common sense" will lead them to conclude that
the latter should always return 0.
Realistically, any implementation won't do anything more exotic that
printing some implementation-defined character string.
Still, I think this calls for a DR.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keit h) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.
Keith Thompson wrote: infobahn <in******@btint ernet.com> writes: printf("%p\n", (void *)0); /* UB, or not? Please explain your
answer. */
Ooh, good catch!
Assuming it appears in a valid context (within a function, and with a
"#include <stdio.h>" in the right place), a strict reading of the
standard could lead to the conclusion that it's undefined behavior.
However, I think it's clear that it's not *intended* to be undefined
behavior, and the standard can (and IMHO should) be read so that it
isn't. (The output is implementation-defined, of course, but that's
not what your asking about.)
C99 7.1.4, "Use of library functions", says:
Each of the following statements applies unless explicitly stated
otherwise in the detailed descriptions that follow: If an
argument to a function has an invalid value (such as a value outside the
domain of the function, or a pointer outside the address space of
the program, or a null pointer, or a pointer to non-modifiable
storage when the corresponding parameter is not const-qualified)
or a type (after promotion) not expected by a function with
variable number of arguments, the behavior is undefined.
C99 7.19.6.1p8, "The fprintf function" (page 279) says:
p The argument shall be a pointer to void. The value of the
pointer is converted to a sequence of printing characters, in
an implementation-defined manner.
Since this doesn't explicitly say that a null pointer is allowed, one
could argue that it's undefined behavior.
Is (void *)0 a null pointer? I thought it was a null pointer constant.
The escape clause, I think is that 7.1.4 says "If an argument to a
function has an invalid value (*such as* ... a null pointer ...)".
If I turn my head to one side and squint, I can read this as saying that
a null pointer can be an invalid value, not necessarily that it
always is one.
Yes. I think so too. But the example involves a null pointer constant.
On the other hand, the same reasoning could imply that strlen(NULL)
doesn't invoke undefined behavior. We have to use common sense to
strlen expects a valid string. NULL is no such thing.
determine that printf("%p\n", (void*)0)) is ok but strlen(NULL) is
not -- but some people's "common sense" will lead them to conclude that
the latter should always return 0.
No. Because a null pointer constant is different from a null pointer.
char *p = NULL;
'p' is a null pointer.
But (void *)0 is a null pointer constant in the example above.
Realistically, any implementation won't do anything more exotic that
printing some implementation-defined character string.
Still, I think this calls for a DR.
I don't.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keit h) ks***@mib.org
<http://www.ghoti.net/~kst> San Diego Supercomputer Center <*>
<http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst> We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do
this.
--
aegis
> infobahn <in******@btint ernet.com> writes: printf("%p\n", (void *)0); /* UB, or not? Please explain your
answer. */
What is _your_ theory? In other words, what leads you to question this
in the first place?
Keith Thompson wrote: Ooh, good catch!
Assuming it appears in a valid context (within a function, and with a
"#include <stdio.h>" in the right place), a strict reading of the
standard could lead to the conclusion that it's undefined behavior.
Why?
C99 7.1.4, "Use of library functions", says:
Each of the following statements applies unless explicitly stated
otherwise in the detailed descriptions that follow: If an
argument to a function has an invalid value (such as a value outside the
domain of the function, or a pointer outside the address space of
the program, or a null pointer, or a pointer to non-modifiable
storage when the corresponding parameter is not const-qualified)
or a type (after promotion) not expected by a function with
variable number of arguments, the behavior is undefined.
C99 7.19.6.1p8, "The fprintf function" (page 279) says:
p The argument shall be a pointer to void. The value of the
pointer is converted to a sequence of printing characters, in
an implementation-defined manner.
Since this doesn't explicitly say that a null pointer is allowed, one
could argue that it's undefined behavior.
Since when was a pointer not allowed to be a null pointer in it's own
right?
The escape clause, I think is that 7.1.4 says "If an argument to a
function has an invalid value (*such as* ... a null pointer ...)".
If I turn my head to one side and squint, I can read this as saying that
a null pointer can be an invalid value, not necessarily that it
always is one.
On the other hand, the same reasoning could imply that strlen(NULL)
doesn't invoke undefined behavior.
Since strlen 'computes the length of _a string_', it's clear that a
null pointer is invalid.
Still, I think this calls for a DR.
I say nay. ;)
--
Peter
aegis wrote:
Is (void *)0 a null pointer? I thought it was a null pointer
constant.
It's both, by definition.
--
Peter
CBFalconer wrote: infobahn wrote:
printf("%p\n", (void *)0); /* UB, or not? Please explain your
answer. */
UB, due to lack of prototype for printf, and appearing outside of
the body of a function.
I'm not convinced there's anything worth discussing in the OP's post,
but your reply is "...100% correct and 0% helpful."
--
Peter
[I haven't seen Keith's reply to my original question, except in
this reply-to-reply.]
aegis wrote:
Keith Thompson wrote: infobahn <in******@btint ernet.com> writes: printf("%p\n", (void *)0); /* UB, or not? Please explain your answer. */
Ooh, good catch!
Assuming it appears in a valid context (within a function, and with a
"#include <stdio.h>" in the right place), a strict reading of the
standard could lead to the conclusion that it's undefined behavior.
That's part of what worries me.
However, I think it's clear that it's not *intended* to be undefined
behavior, and the standard can (and IMHO should) be read so that it
isn't.
And that's the rest of what worries me.
(The output is implementation-defined, of course, but that's
not what your asking about.)
Correct.
C99 7.1.4, "Use of library functions", says:
Yes, that's part of my concern.
C99 7.19.6.1p8, "The fprintf function" (page 279) says:
And that's the other part.
Is (void *)0 a null pointer? I thought it was a null pointer constant.
If it worries you, pretend I said:
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void)
{
int *p = NULL;
printf("%p\n", (void *)p);
return 0;
}
The escape clause, I think is that 7.1.4 says "If an argument to a
function has an invalid value (*such as* ... a null pointer ...)".
If I turn my head to one side and squint, I can read this as saying
that a null pointer can be an invalid value, not necessarily that
it always is one.
The problem I have with this rationalisation is that it sounds too
much like rationalisation . I can hear Herbert Schildt saying "It
doesn't say you can't!", and that worries me.
Realistically, any implementation won't do anything more exotic that
printing some implementation-defined character string.
Still, I think this calls for a DR.
Or at least a clarification from the Great Powers, complete with C&V. This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion. Similar topics | |
by: Kwan Ting |
last post by:
The_Sage, I see you've gotten yourself a twin asking for program in
comp.lang.c++ .
http://groups.google.co.uk/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&th=45cd1b289c71c33c&rnum=1
If you the oh so mighty programmer that you pretend to be, why don't you
just write some? (And oh, void main is still not allow by the C++ standard.)
Seeming as how you tried to quote the standard in an attempt to pretend
you're right, I'll quote the standard to once...
|
by: dam_fool_2003 |
last post by:
Hai,
I thank those who helped me to create a single linked list with int
type. Now I wanted to try out for a void* type. Below is the code:
#include<stdlib.h>
#include<stdio.h>
#include<string.h>
#include<stddef.h>
struct node
|
by: Stig Brautaset |
last post by:
Hi group,
I'm playing with a little generic linked list/stack library, and have a
little problem with the interface of the pop() function. If I used a
struct like this it would be simple:
struct node {
struct node *next;
void *data;
};
|
by: Jason luo |
last post by:
Hi all,
In c99-standard page 52,there is a sentence about void,as below:
If an expression of any other type is evaluated as a void expression,
its value or designator is discarded.
I don't know how to understand it, How to evaluate the expression as a
void expression? explicit conversion the expression? but, befor the
sentence ,"implicit or explicit conversions (except to void) shall not
|
by: sunglo |
last post by:
My doubt comes from trying to understand how thread return values work
(I know, it's off topic here), and I'm wondering about the meaning of
the "void **" parameter that pthread_join expects (I think this is
topical, since it's a C question, but please correct me and apologies
if I'm wrong).
I suppose that it's this way to allow for "generic" pointer
modification, but this implies dereferencing the "void **" pointer to
get a "void *"...
| | |
by: Juggernaut |
last post by:
I am trying to create a p_thread
pthread_create(&threads, &attr, Teste, (void *)var);
where var is a char variable.
But this doesnt't work, I get this message:
test.c:58: warning: cast to pointer from integer of different size.
Now I thought that when it was a void I could pass anything? Thing is it
works when I use an int, but in this case I wanted to use a char. It wouldnt
be hard to work around it, but it annoys me because I've heard...
|
by: Stijn van Dongen |
last post by:
A question about void*. I have a hash library where the hash create
function accepts functions
unsigned (*hash)(const void *a)
int (*cmp) (const void *a, const void *b)
The insert function accepts a void* key argument, and uses the
functions above to store this argument. It returns something (linked to
the key) that the caller can store a value in. The actual key argument
is always of the same pointer type (as seen in the caller,...
|
by: maadhuu |
last post by:
hello, this is a piece of code ,which is giving an error.
#include<stdio.h>
int main()
{
int a =10;
void *p = &a;
printf("%d ", *p ); //error....why should it //be an error ?can't the
compiler make out because //of %d that the pointer is supposed to refer to
an integer ?? or is explicit type casting required ??
|
by: Erik de Castro Lopo |
last post by:
Hi all,
The GNU C compiler allows a void pointer to be incremented and
the behaviour is equivalent to incrementing a char pointer.
Is this legal C99 or is this a GNU C extention?
Thanks in advance.
Erik
|
by: Hystou |
last post by:
Most computers default to English, but sometimes we require a different language, especially when relocating. Forgot to request a specific language before your computer shipped? No problem! You can effortlessly switch the default language on Windows 10 without reinstalling. I'll walk you through it.
First, let's disable language synchronization. With a Microsoft account, language settings sync across devices. To prevent any complications,...
|
by: Oralloy |
last post by:
Hello folks,
I am unable to find appropriate documentation on the type promotion of bit-fields when using the generalised comparison operator "<=>".
The problem is that using the GNU compilers, it seems that the internal comparison operator "<=>" tries to promote arguments from unsigned to signed.
This is as boiled down as I can make it.
Here is my compilation command:
g++-12 -std=c++20 -Wnarrowing bit_field.cpp
Here is the code in...
| | |
by: Hystou |
last post by:
Overview:
Windows 11 and 10 have less user interface control over operating system update behaviour than previous versions of Windows. In Windows 11 and 10, there is no way to turn off the Windows Update option using the Control Panel or Settings app; it automatically checks for updates and installs any it finds, whether you like it or not. For most users, this new feature is actually very convenient. If you want to control the update process,...
|
by: tracyyun |
last post by:
Dear forum friends,
With the development of smart home technology, a variety of wireless communication protocols have appeared on the market, such as Zigbee, Z-Wave, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, etc. Each protocol has its own unique characteristics and advantages, but as a user who is planning to build a smart home system, I am a bit confused by the choice of these technologies. I'm particularly interested in Zigbee because I've heard it does some...
|
by: isladogs |
last post by:
The next Access Europe User Group meeting will be on Wednesday 1 May 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC+1) and finishing by 19:30 (7.30PM).
In this session, we are pleased to welcome a new presenter, Adolph Dupré who will be discussing some powerful techniques for using class modules.
He will explain when you may want to use classes instead of User Defined Types (UDT). For example, to manage the data in unbound forms.
Adolph will...
|
by: TSSRALBI |
last post by:
Hello
I'm a network technician in training and I need your help.
I am currently learning how to create and manage the different types of VPNs and I have a question about LAN-to-LAN VPNs.
The last exercise I practiced was to create a LAN-to-LAN VPN between two Pfsense firewalls, by using IPSEC protocols.
I succeeded, with both firewalls in the same network. But I'm wondering if it's possible to do the same thing, with 2 Pfsense firewalls...
|
by: 6302768590 |
last post by:
Hai team
i want code for transfer the data from one system to another through IP address by using C# our system has to for every 5mins then we have to update the data what the data is updated we have to send another system
|
by: muto222 |
last post by:
How can i add a mobile payment intergratation into php mysql website.
| | |
by: bsmnconsultancy |
last post by:
In today's digital era, a well-designed website is crucial for businesses looking to succeed. Whether you're a small business owner or a large corporation in Toronto, having a strong online presence can significantly impact your brand's success. BSMN Consultancy, a leader in Website Development in Toronto offers valuable insights into creating effective websites that not only look great but also perform exceptionally well. In this comprehensive...
| | |
