Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 12:47:30 -0500 From: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <n@nectar.com> To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Peter Pentchev <roam@orbitel.bg>, hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: free() and const warnings Message-ID: <20010607124729.B4940@shade.nectar.com> In-Reply-To: <XFMail.010607102051.jhb@FreeBSD.org>; from jhb@FreeBSD.org on Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 10:20:51AM -0700 References: <20010607195634.I724@ringworld.oblivion.bg> <XFMail.010607102051.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 10:20:51AM -0700, John Baldwin wrote:
>
> On 07-Jun-01 Peter Pentchev wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 07:07:22PM +0300, Peter Pentchev wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Is free((void *) (size_t) ptr) the only way to free a const whatever *ptr
> >> with WARNS=2? (or more specifically, with -Wcast-qual)
> >
> > Uhm. OK. So size_t may not be enough to hold a pointer. What is it then -
> > caddr_t?
>
> uintptr_t for data pointers. In theory I think code pointers may not fit in a
> uintptr_t.
C99 says of uintptr_t only that for any valid pointer p, the following
is true:
(void *)(uintptr_t)p == (void *)p
Likewise for intptr_t. I read that as covering both code and data
pointers.
Of course, who's to say the way uintptr_t is implemented on our
platform adheres to the same rules :-)
> free((void *)(uintptr_t)ptr) should work.
>
> Of course, this begs the question of why you are free'ing a const. :)
Indeed!
Cheers,
--
Jacques Vidrine / n@nectar.com / jvidrine@verio.net / nectar@FreeBSD.org
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010607124729.B4940>