Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen
From: davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.COM (Wm E Davidsen Jr)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: Common malloc/free practice violates ANSI standard ?
Message-ID: <1152@crdos1.crd.ge.COM>
Date: 16 Oct 89 19:51:33 GMT
References: <1989Oct14.043811.669@anucsd.oz> <7366@thor.acc.stolaf.edu>
Reply-To: davidsen@crdos1.UUCP (bill davidsen)
Organization: GE Corp R&D Center
Lines: 22

In article <7366@thor.acc.stolaf.edu>, mike@thor.acc.stolaf.edu (Mike Haertel) writes:
|  In article <1989Oct14.043811.669@anucsd.oz> bdm@anucsd.oz (Brendan McKay) writes:
|  >* assigning a void* to an OBJ* involves rounding up to an even address
|  
|  The standard doesn't say anything about "rounding" pointers.

	[  exactly so, it doesn't say *anything* about it  ]

|  Assigning a misaligned void* to an OBJ* might well cause a trap when
|  the OBJ* is dereferenced.  Or even when the void* is just assigned to it!

  You're right, of course, but the standard doesn't forbid performing an
allignment on a pointer assign, does it? I don't have a copy here, but I
think we discussed this when someone said the standard *required*
alligning the pointer.

  Just because no sane person would do something doesn't mean it's forbidden.
-- 
bill davidsen	(davidsen@crdos1.crd.GE.COM -or- uunet!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen)
"The world is filled with fools. They blindly follow their so-called
'reason' in the face of the church and common sense. Any fool can see
that the world is flat!" - anon