Re: sizeof(ptr) = ?
- From: Richard <rgrdev@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 16:00:08 +0200
James Kuyper <jameskuyper@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Richard wrote:
James Kuyper <jameskuyper@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Richard Tobin wrote:
In article <7kt3v4-2fi.ln1@xxxxxxxx>,To answer the associated question: malloc() knows which memory type to
allocate, because the only memory types it's allowed to allocate are
memory types that can be used to construct objects of any type. If
there is no such memory on a given machine, malloc() can only return a
null pointer, which renders it pretty useless.
Which is fair enough and obvious. I was making the point that a few core
users constantly mention that pointers can (theoretically) point to
different "types of memory". I think its pretty done to death now I guess.
I can't see any reason why that wouldn't be possible, but when you
brought that concept into the discussion, you should have indicated
that you were doing so; up until your message the context of the
discussion was much broader than just those particular kinds of
implementations, and at least some of us thought you were still
discussing that broader context.
I clarified this about 7 posts back in the thread to be fair.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: sizeof(ptr) = ?
- From: jameskuyper
- Re: sizeof(ptr) = ?
- References:
- sizeof(ptr) = ?
- From: William Xu
- Re: sizeof(ptr) = ?
- From: santosh
- Re: sizeof(ptr) = ?
- From: Richard
- Re: sizeof(ptr) = ?
- From: Peter 'Shaggy' Haywood
- Re: sizeof(ptr) = ?
- From: Richard Tobin
- Re: sizeof(ptr) = ?
- From: James Kuyper
- Re: sizeof(ptr) = ?
- From: Richard
- Re: sizeof(ptr) = ?
- From: James Kuyper
- sizeof(ptr) = ?
- Prev by Date: Re: sizeof(ptr) = ?
- Next by Date: Re: Why connot declare a static member of STRUCT or UNION?
- Previous by thread: Re: sizeof(ptr) = ?
- Next by thread: Re: sizeof(ptr) = ?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading