Re: Override malloc,calloc,realloc and free?

Discussion in 'C Programming' started by Dan Pop, Jun 27, 2003.

  1. Dan Pop

    Dan Pop Guest

    In <> "Douglas A. Gwyn" <> writes:

    >I still don't understand what the problem is supposed to be.
    >A program might not *have* any output if it is rejected by the
    >implementation for containing undefined behavior etc.
    >There are essentially three kinds of program behavior:
    >(1) specified.
    >(2) unspecified but "stable".
    >(3) undefined.
    >A s.c. program contains no instances of (3).
    >A s.c. program can contain instances of (2), but its output
    >shall not depend on which of the allowed choices the
    >implementation has made for each such instance


    What *exactly* is defining the program's behaviour, apart from its
    output (in the context of the C standard)?

    If it's only its output, then it makes no sense to say that a strictly
    conforming program can contain unspecified behaviour if its output does
    not depend on it.

    Dan
    --
    Dan Pop
    DESY Zeuthen, RZ group
    Email:
    Dan Pop, Jun 27, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Dan Pop

    Dan Pop Guest

    In <> "Douglas A. Gwyn" <> writes:

    >Dan Pop wrote:
    >> In <> "Douglas A. Gwyn" <> writes:
    >> >There are essentially three kinds of program behavior:
    >> >(1) specified.
    >> >(2) unspecified but "stable".
    >> >(3) undefined.
    >> >A s.c. program contains no instances of (3).
    >> >A s.c. program can contain instances of (2), but its output
    >> >shall not depend on which of the allowed choices the
    >> >implementation has made for each such instance

    >> What *exactly* is defining the program's behaviour, apart from its
    >> output (in the context of the C standard)?
    >> If it's only its output, then it makes no sense to say that a strictly
    >> conforming program can contain unspecified behaviour if its output does
    >> not depend on it.

    >
    >What I said makes perfect sense.


    To you, maybe.

    >It is your attempt to reduce
    >the semantic content to a mere macro expansion of definitions
    >that prevents understanding.


    I fail to see how this is supposed to clarify the statements you've made
    in your previous post. Sheer insult doesn't make a particularly
    convincing argument. But if this is the best you can produce...

    Dan
    --
    Dan Pop
    DESY Zeuthen, RZ group
    Email:
    Dan Pop, Jun 27, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Dan Pop

    Jun Woong Guest

    "Dan Pop" <> wrote in message news:bdh74o$m55$...
    > In <> "Douglas A. Gwyn" <> writes:
    >
    > >I still don't understand what the problem is supposed to be.
    > >A program might not *have* any output if it is rejected by the
    > >implementation for containing undefined behavior etc.
    > >There are essentially three kinds of program behavior:
    > >(1) specified.
    > >(2) unspecified but "stable".
    > >(3) undefined.
    > >A s.c. program contains no instances of (3).
    > >A s.c. program can contain instances of (2), but its output
    > >shall not depend on which of the allowed choices the
    > >implementation has made for each such instance

    >
    > What *exactly* is defining the program's behaviour, apart from its
    > output (in the context of the C standard)?
    >
    > If it's only its output, then it makes no sense to say that a strictly
    > conforming program can contain unspecified behaviour if its output does
    > not depend on it.
    >


    It seems that some misunderstanding is in existence here even if both
    of you are saying the same and correct thing.


    --
    Jun, Woong ()
    Dept. of Physics, Univ. of Seoul
    Jun Woong, Jun 27, 2003
    #3
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Jun Woong

    Re: Override malloc,calloc,realloc and free?

    Jun Woong, Jun 26, 2003, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,076
    Jun Woong
    Jun 26, 2003
  2. Dan Pop
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    897
    Dan Pop
    Jun 26, 2003
  3. Douglas A. Gwyn

    Re: Override malloc,calloc,realloc and free?

    Douglas A. Gwyn, Jun 26, 2003, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    745
    Douglas A. Gwyn
    Jun 26, 2003
  4. Jun Woong

    Re: Override malloc,calloc,realloc and free?

    Jun Woong, Jun 27, 2003, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    839
    Jun Woong
    Jun 27, 2003
  5. Jun Woong

    Re: Override malloc,calloc,realloc and free?

    Jun Woong, Jun 27, 2003, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    785
    Jun Woong
    Jun 27, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page