Linus Torvalds <[email protected]> writes:
> On Thu, 8 Feb 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>>
>> But THE CALLER CANNOT AND MUST NOT CARE! Because the sign of "char" is
>> implementation-defined, so if you call "strcmp()", you are already
>> basically saying: I don't care (and I _cannot_ care) what sign you are
>> using.
>
> Let me explain it another way.
>
> Say you use
>
> signed char *myname, *yourname;
>
> if (strcmp(myname,yourname) < 0)
> printf("Ha, I win!\n")
>
> and you compile this on an architecture where "char" is signed even
> without the explicit "signed".
As far as I can read the C99 standard, the "char", "signed char", and
"unsigned char", are all different types:
"The three types char, signed char, and unsigned char are collectively called
the character types. The implementation shall define char to have the same range,
representation, and behavior as either signed char or unsigned
char.(35)
....
(35) CHAR_MIN, defined in <limits.h>, will have one of the values 0 or
SCHAR_MIN, and this can be used to distinguish the two
options. Irrespective of the choice made, char is a separate type
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
from the other two and is not compatible with either.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
"
If so, then the code above is broken no matter what representation of
"char" is chosen for given arch, as strcmp() takes "char*" arguments,
that are not compatible with either "signed char*" or "unsigned char*".
-- Sergei.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
