> Your faith in gcc is as charming as it is naive <wink>: the most > interesting cases of undefined behavior can't be checked no-way, no-how at > compile-time. That's why Barry keeps talking employers into dumping > thousands of dollars into a single Insure++ license. Insure++ actually tags > every pointer at runtime with its source, and gripes if non-equality > comparisons are done on a pair not derived from the same array or malloc > etc. Since Python type objects are individually allocated (not taken from a > preallocated contiguous vector), Insure++ should complain about that > compare. IMHO, *this* *particular* gripe of Insure++ is just a pain in the butt, and I wish there was a way to turn it off in Insure++ without having to fix the code. IMHO, this was included in the standard to allow segmented-memory implementations of C. Think certain DOS or Windows 3.1 memory models where a pointer is a segment plus an offset. This is not current practice even on Palmpilots! The standard may say that such comparisons are undefined, but I don't care about this particular undefinedness, and I'm annoyed by the required patches. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4