This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: malloc attributes and realloc


ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu (Kaveh R. Ghazi)  wrote on 02.01.04 in <200401021954.i02JsfQC003902@caip.rutgers.edu>:

> The pointer comparison code in alloca.c is the way we support the
> alloca() function for NON-gcc compilers.  Therefore pointer comparison
> works on _every_ stage1 compiler used to bootstrap gcc going back to
> the oldest traditional C compiler up until today's ISO C.  That's a
> lot of compilers supporting this so-called extension which is why
> (other than for segmented arches) I find it surprising we cannot rely
> on this behavior. ;-)

Well, obviosly, segmented arches are exactly why the standard says we  
cannot rely on this behaviour.

Remember that the standard *does* try to support more arches than gcc.

MfG Kai


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]