[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: malloca, freea, and Intel MPX
From: |
Bruno Haible |
Subject: |
Re: malloca, freea, and Intel MPX |
Date: |
Sun, 04 Feb 2018 19:33:54 +0100 |
User-agent: |
KMail/5.1.3 (Linux/4.4.0-104-generic; KDE/5.18.0; x86_64; ; ) |
Hi Paul,
> I view conversion from intptr_t to pointer as being in a
> similar category: if we avoid these conversions now we will be saving some
> work
> in the future.
If you can't cast from 'void *' to 'uintptr_t' and back, the language is no
longer C any more. Indeed, with the added __bnd_* primitives, the language is
going to Ada way.
It will be useful to revisit the ca. 90 casts to [u]intptr_t that we have in
gnulib
when the shape of the new language will become clearer. Maybe it will have
sizeof (type *) == 3 * sizeof (void *), who knows?
For now, given that the MPX stuff is considered experimental, I think it's too
early
to rewrite code for its sake.
Bruno
- Re: malloca, freea are not thread-safe, (continued)
- Re: malloca, freea are not thread-safe, Bruno Haible, 2018/02/02
- Re: malloca, freea are not thread-safe, Bruno Haible, 2018/02/02
- Re: malloca, freea are not thread-safe, Paul Eggert, 2018/02/02
- Re: malloca, freea are not thread-safe, Bruno Haible, 2018/02/02
- Re: malloca, freea are not thread-safe, Paul Eggert, 2018/02/04
- Re: malloca, freea, and Intel MPX, Bruno Haible, 2018/02/03
- Re: malloca, freea, and Intel MPX, Paul Eggert, 2018/02/04
- Re: malloca, freea, and Intel MPX,
Bruno Haible <=
- Re: malloca, freea, and Intel MPX, Paul Eggert, 2018/02/04
- Re: malloca, freea are not thread-safe, Florian Weimer, 2018/02/03
- Re: malloca, freea are not thread-safe, Bruno Haible, 2018/02/03
- Re: Intel mpx, Bruno Haible, 2018/02/03
- Re: malloca, freea are not thread-safe, Paul Eggert, 2018/02/04