[Gnu-arch-users] Re: posible issue on ia64 with va_args.

[Miles Bader]

On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 10:03:04AM +0100, Jan Hudec wrote:
> > Even when that relation holds, this particular case can screw you; for
> > it to `work', you need sizeof (int) == sizeof (whatever_ptr).
> 
> Even than, the spec does not guarantee you are safe.
> 
> The spec does not say anything about relation of pointer to integer. It
> implies, that (void *)0 == NULL and (int)NULL == 0, but does not say the
> memory representation is the same.

Of course, but I don't think that particular silliness happens in practice
anymore (though I suppose maybe there were a few wonky-ass computers back in
the day that had odd non-zero representations of a null pointer).  There's
too much dependence on using bzero to initialize pointer-containing
structures these days for a non-zero null to fly, and there's no pressure for
that to change (whereas there _is_ pressure pushing integer/pointer size
differences).

[After all, at least according to C89, you can't even depend on a
two's-complement representation for integers!  Did they change that in C99,
BTW?  I vaguely recall that they did...]

-Miles
-- 
Would you like fries with that?