Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!tank!mimsy!chris From: chris@mimsy.UUCP (Chris Torek) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: effect of free() Message-ID: <19574@mimsy.UUCP> Date: 13 Sep 89 22:44:51 GMT References: <319@cubmol.BIO.COLUMBIA.EDU> <3756@buengc.BU.EDU> Organization: U of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Science, Coll. Pk., MD 20742 Lines: 24 In article jdr+@andrew.cmu.edu (Jeff Rosenfeld) writes: >I can't believe this went so long without a response. It went about 15 minutes without a response. CMU really ought to have all the followups on this already.... >Similarly, the only segemented architecture with which I am familiar >(80*86) does even allow any operations on segment registers save load, >push, and validate (or some such). Here you are wrong: the 80x86 has `load', `store', `push', and `pop' for segment registers. Unfortunately, `load' implies `validate' (presumably `pop' does as well). >The key is that with segments, dereferencing begins by loading a >segement register. Get it? No, the key is that with segments, merely loading the segment register can cause a trap, and merely mentioning the value of a pointer variable (such as in `if (ptr == NULL)') may load a segment register. -- In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 7163) Domain: chris@mimsy.umd.edu Path: uunet!mimsy!chris