search for: def_

...introduced by declarations (3.1) and implicitly cre- ated by the implementation (12.2). A declaration (clause 7) introduces names into a translation unit or redeclares names introduced by previous declarations. An object is a region of storage. An object is created by a definition (_basic.def_) Each declaration _creates_ an object. The word create means that each has a region of bytes, distinct from all others. > The changes to address Core issue 73 invalidates your reasoning No, they don't. I'm describing a fundamental feature of C and C++ that cannot be disputed. T...

...and implicitly cre- > ated by the implementation (12.2). > > A declaration (clause 7) introduces names into a translation unit or > redeclares names introduced by previous declarations. > > An object is a region of storage. > > An object is created by a definition (_basic.def_) basic.def doesn't contain the word "create" nor words to that effect, AFAICT. Furthermore, basic.life 3.8/7 makes it clear that an object may be created on top of another object, and the name of the first object will correctly evaluate to the new object. So that reasoning do...

...have with malloc/free aren't > available with new/delete. Also, since new/delete can be overridden > at any time (as late as runtime with LD_PRELOAD and friends), 3 The program's definitions are used instead of the default versions supplied by the implementation (_dcl.fct.def_). Such replacement occurs prior to program startup (_basic.def.odr_, _basic.start_). So, the replacement is done before start, if later, there are no requirements. And, the replacement has known semantics.

On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 6:16 PM, David Vandevoorde <daveed at vandevoorde.com> wrote: > > An object is created by a definition (_basic.def_) > > basic.def doesn't contain the word "create" nor words to that effect That should be [intro.object]: "An object is a region of storage. An object is created by a definition..." > Furthermore, basic.life 3.8/7 makes it clear that an object > may be created o...

On Oct 15, 2008, at 3:53 PM, Mike Stump wrote: [...] > Objects are defined like so: > > Two pointers of > the same type compare equal if and only if they are both null, > both > point to the same object or function, or both point one past the > end > of the same array. > > This means they _must_ compare !=, if they are different objects. Aha! Thanks for

...39;t >> available with new/delete. Also, since new/delete can be overridden >> at any time (as late as runtime with LD_PRELOAD and friends), > > 3 The program's definitions are used instead of the default > versions > supplied by the implementation (_dcl.fct.def_). Such > replacement > occurs prior to program startup (_basic.def.odr_, _basic.start_). > > So, the replacement is done before start, if later, there are no > requirements. And, the replacement has known semantics. But isn't that still too late? The optimizer often must...

On Apr 30, 2008, at 8:51 PM, David Vandevoorde wrote: >> This isn't safe in general unless you can (tightly) bound "n". You >> don't want to overflow the stack. > > Ah yes, of course. Does LLVM do this for known & small constant n? We don't do this currently, primarily because I haven't seen a case where it is a win yet: it would be very easy to

...message such as, When dialing out from Zap/1 channel: Executing Dial("Zap/1-1","mISDN/g:incoming/2107253178|60") in new stack Checking Availbl. Chan in Group: incoming --> * NEW CHANNEL dad: oad:2107253178 ctx: * CALL: g:TEmode/2107253178 --> Group Call group: TEmode def_l1:-1, portup:0 --> ! No free channel chan 0x81afc20 even after Group Call --> SEND: State Down -- Couldn't call g:TEmode/2107253178 == Everyone is busy/congested at this time (0:0/0/0) -- Executing Congestion("Zap/1-1", "") in new stack Both cards are in...

On Oct 15, 2008, at 8:28 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Oct 15, 2008, at 6:58 AM, Tatu Vaajalahti wrote: >>> Yes, but why do you think they should get a different address? I >>> can >>> understand that it is surprising that they do, but determining >>> whether >>> this is legal or not requires reading the language standard. >>> Hopefully

...ailable with new/delete. Also, since new/delete can be overridden >>> at any time (as late as runtime with LD_PRELOAD and friends), >> >> 3 The program's definitions are used instead of the default >> versions >> supplied by the implementation (_dcl.fct.def_). Such >> replacement >> occurs prior to program startup (_basic.def.odr_, _basic.start_). >> >> So, the replacement is done before start, if later, there are no >> requirements. And, the replacement has known semantics. > > > But isn't that still too...