mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bruce Guenter <bruceg@em.ca>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] warnkill trivia 2/2
Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2002 15:57:49 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020901155749.A8323@em.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20020901123903.GB7325@louise.pinerecords.com>; from szepe@pinerecords.com on Sun, Sep 01, 2002 at 02:39:03PM +0200

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1319 bytes --]

On Sun, Sep 01, 2002 at 02:39:03PM +0200, Tomas Szepe wrote:
> I've been playing a bit with how gcc handles the const qualifiers
> and made an interesting discovery:
> 
> Trying to compile
> 
> typedef int *p_int;
> void a(const p_int t) { *t = 0; }
> void b(const p_int t) { t = (int *) 0; }
> void c(const int *t) { *t = 0; }
> void d(const int *t) { t = (int *) 0; }
> void e(int const *t) { *t = 0; }
> void f(int const *t) { t = (int *) 0; }
> 
> will give 'assignment of read-only location' warnings for
> b(), c() and e(), i.e. it's impossible to have a constant
> pointer to a non-constant value w/o using a qualified
> typedef.

If you want a constant *pointer*, use:
	void f(int* const t)
	(read "f is a function, taking parameter constant pointer to
	int, returning void)

> W/o a typedef, gcc seems unable to tell the difference
> between 'const int *' and 'int const *' altogether.

That's because there is no difference ("pointer to integer constant" vs
"pointer to constant integer").

See http://untroubled.org/articles/cdecls.txt for one of the best
references I've ever seen to understanding C type declarations.
-- 
Bruce Guenter <bruceg@em.ca> http://em.ca/~bruceg/ http://untroubled.org/
OpenPGP key: 699980E8 / D0B7 C8DD 365D A395 29DA  2E2A E96F B2DC 6999 80E8

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 232 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2002-09-01 21:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-09-01 10:56 Tomas Szepe
2002-09-01 10:57 ` David S. Miller
2002-09-01 11:28   ` Tomas Szepe
2002-09-01 11:25     ` David S. Miller
2002-09-01 11:37       ` Tomas Szepe
2002-09-01 11:35         ` David S. Miller
2002-09-01 12:10           ` Tomas Szepe
2002-09-01 12:16             ` David S. Miller
2002-09-01 12:39               ` Tomas Szepe
2002-09-01 21:57                 ` Bruce Guenter [this message]
2002-09-02 22:24     ` Jan Hudec
2002-09-01 15:27 ` [PATCH] warnkill trivia 2/2 (correction) Tomas Szepe
2002-09-01 14:52 [PATCH] warnkill trivia 2/2 Mikael Pettersson
2002-09-01 14:56 ` Tomas Szepe

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20020901155749.A8323@em.ca \
    --to=bruceg@em.ca \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

Powered by JetHome