Xref: utzoo comp.sys.ibm.pc:22312 comp.sys.intel:608
Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!mks!egisin
From: egisin@mks.UUCP (Eric Gisin)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc,comp.sys.intel
Subject: Re: correct code for pointer subtraction
Summary: Oh my god
Message-ID: <609@mks.UUCP>
Date: 16 Dec 88 18:06:44 GMT
References: <597@mks.UUCP> <8377@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> <8455@sequent.UUCP> <2237@iscuva.ISCS.COM>
Organization: Mortice Kern Systems, Waterloo, Ont.
Lines: 17

In article <2237@iscuva.ISCS.COM>, carlp@iscuva.ISCS.COM (Carl Paukstis) writes:
< In article <600@mks.UUCP> egisin@mks.UUCP (Eric Gisin) writes:
< .>Please read my code. I have two pointers to "s", a single object.
< .>Declaring "s" with 1 or 10000 makes no difference.
...
< Of course, the code you posted is NOT legal, since the two pointers in the
< example *do not* point inside the same object.  You have verified that the
< incorrect code is generated when you IN FACT declare "struct six s[10000]"?
< If so, it's a bona-fide bug.  But if it won't work with your example, the
< worst conclusion you can directly draw is that your example is "not 
< conformant".

No, I DO NOT have to verify that it still generates incorrect code
when I declare "s" as s[10000]. "diff" is a global function,
and could be called from another module with a legal object.
A compiler with a dumb linker cannot generate 
code for diff depending on how it is called in than module.