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: why the difference of two global pointers is not a constant?

From: Jeffrey Law <law at redhat dot com>
To: Mike Stump <mrs at apple dot com>
Cc: Rafael Espíndola <rafael dot espindola at gmail dot com>, Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>, GCC Mailing List <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 11:56:33 -0600
Subject: Re: why the difference of two global pointers is not a constant?
References: <564d96fb0607241330l6403bdf5h9bcd64630ab6a5fe@mail.gmail.com> <m3y7ui1u9j.fsf@zeus.integrable-solutions.net> <564d96fb0607250500j759acf18h991104d02a425c4c@mail.gmail.com> <EDA9F102-B43F-4402-B35E-5182D4184651@apple.com>
Reply-to: law at redhat dot com

On Tue, 2006-07-25 at 10:49 -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Jul 25, 2006, at 5:00 AM, Rafael Espíndola wrote:
> > In the particular case of two static functions or two static global
> > pointers, it is possible for the compiler to compute it. Isn't it? I
> > think that the linker will reorder the sections, but not the functions
> > inside a section.
> 
> :-)  Your assumption would not be accurate for all the machines gcc  
> targets.  darwin in particular can and does such reordering.
As does HP-UX as can Solaris, Linux and anything using ELF in
conjunction with -ffunction-sections.

jeff

References:
- why the difference of two global pointers is not a constant?
  - From: Rafael EspÃndola
- Re: why the difference of two global pointers is not a constant?
  - From: Gabriel Dos Reis
- Re: why the difference of two global pointers is not a constant?
  - From: Rafael EspÃndola
- Re: why the difference of two global pointers is not a constant?
  - From: Mike Stump

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