On Tue, Jan 23, 2001 at 11:51:15PM -0800, Richard Henderson wrote: > On Thu, Jan 11, 2001 at 12:59:24AM +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > What I said is that I can write this C code: > > > > int x[2], * p = (int *) (((char *) &x)+1); > > main() > > { > > *p = 0; > > } > > > > This is legal C code. > > Err, no. This is not "legal" by any stretch of the imagination. > This code has undefined behaviour. I know this code has undefined behaviour at _runtime_. But I thought you were obliged to allow it to compile. That was my only point. > We aren't even obliged to allow this to compile. I'd love if you could forbid it to compile. Andrea - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Re: Compatibility issue with 2.2.19pre7 Russell King
- Re: Compatibility issue with 2.2.19pre7 Andrea Arcangeli
- Re: Compatibility issue with 2.2.19pre7 Russell King
- Re: Compatibility issue with 2.2.19pre7 Andi Kleen
- Re: Compatibility issue with 2.2.19pre7 Russell King
- Re: Compatibility issue with 2.2.19pre7 Manfred
- Re: Compatibility issue with 2.2.19pre7 Andi Kleen
- Re: Compatibility issue with 2.2.19pre7 Manfred
- Re: Compatibility issue with 2.2.19pre7 Russell King
- Re: Compatibility issue with 2.2.19pre7 Richard Henderson
- Re: Compatibility issue with 2.2.19pre7 Andrea Arcangeli
- Re: Compatibility issue with 2.2.19pre7 Richard Henderson
- Re: Compatibility issue with 2.2.19pre7 Andrea Arcangeli
- Re: Compatibility issue with 2.2.19pre7 Richard Henderson
- Re: Compatibility issue with 2.2.19pre7 Thomas Pornin
- Re: Compatibility issue with 2.2.19pre7 Trond Myklebust
- Re: Compatibility issue with 2.2.19pre7 Manfred Spraul
- Re: Compatibility issue with 2.2.19pre7 Trond Myklebust
- Re: Compatibility issue with 2.2.19pre7 Trond Myklebust
- Re: Compatibility issue with 2.2.19pre7 Andrea Arcangeli
- Re: Compatibility issue with 2.2.19pre7 Andrea Arcangeli