Xref: utzoo comp.lang.c:22670 comp.unix.wizards:18609
Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!iuvax!rutgers!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!sumax!thebes!quick!cjsa!jeff
From: jeff@cjsa.WA.COM (Jeffery Small)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: How do I keep pointers aligned?
Message-ID: <1965@cjsa.WA.COM>
Date: 10 Oct 89 16:33:44 GMT
References: <12879@s.ms.uky.edu> <1989Oct10.021720.19815@utzoo.uucp>
Organization: C. Jeffery Small and Associates - Woodinville, WA
Lines: 20

henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes:
>In article <12879@s.ms.uky.edu> sean@ms.uky.edu (Sean Casey) writes:
>>Lint tells me I have possible pointer alignment problems.
>>s = (STUFF *) malloc((unsigned) sizeof(STUFF));

>The problem is that lint has no way of knowing that the `char *' returned
>by malloc is sufficiently well-aligned for use as a `STUFF *'.  In fact,
>it is -- that's part of the specs of malloc -- but lint doesn't know that.
>In practice, "possible pointer alignment problem" just means "better look
>twice to make sure this is right".  It doesn't mean "this is wrong".

Something I have often wondered:

Is there a good reason why lint hasn't been modified to understand the
"specs" of malloc and eliminate these unnecessary warnings?  Does building
such knowledge into lint violate its design philosophy?
--
Jeffery Small    (206) 485-5596            uw-beaver!uw-nsr!uw-warp
C. Jeffery Small and Associates                                    !cjsa!jeff
19112 152nd Ave NE - Woodinville, WA  98072           uunet!nwnexus