X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature:	a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date
	:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=iZgq7lVlUg0pSw7g
	TgUYESI9er3tHq44Bzk7ww493rDv1GqfVS6zPXcrnZRSepeN3HjEbwmc8CYnvHrN
	5reSgJCMCV6Vq2zOBrujGg694sK6c3dCBHr7j4vdzGvjkY1tczZnqajPUAD7RKhr
	KDiShC5cTBvTAuquTzldJ7EpXeY=
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date
	:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding; s=default; bh=jWu3PES4CA42Ip3VV/BTHX
	LKl1g=; b=USfM0qSoVHeLQ6G+TSWagP+x0vD4VwybNvuPGGLtRrNLwWdaoOiuPB
	yhTmLXuKvhfdvOkgItgxvpNP5ABjXvAQhdIFq3sRuhyw9pFCeqT3y3xOdfLQB4UN
	4fjAUXXz6/6G9NdAwPKnI41GH6xn3fa4YxdexlYqqiS+lcN8cBxCs=
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Authentication-Results:	sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found:	No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status:	No, score=-4.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,GIT_PATCH_2,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=H*M:online, H*F:D*t-online.de, walsh, Walsh
X-HELO:	mailout01.t-online.de
Subject:	Re: free() and implicit conversion to a function pointer
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<c5af0608-17c4-2270-dbba-c3b704c9226e AT t-online DOT de> <f76885f4-f99f-dc50-2a19-cb892a62db7e AT t-online DOT de> <58CB07A8 DOT 9010401 AT tlinx DOT org>
From:	=?UTF-8?Q?Hans-Bernhard_Br=c3=b6ker?= <HBBroeker AT t-online DOT de>
Message-ID:	<33519566-7f9a-ad78-6160-ccfa6465c279@t-online.de>
Date:	Fri, 17 Mar 2017 00:49:15 +0100
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<58CB07A8.9010401@tlinx.org>
X-IsSubscribed:	yes

Am 16.03.2017 um 22:46 schrieb L A Walsh:
> Going by subj and talk below, this is a bit confusing...
>
> But it looks like you are testing 'free' for a value?

Not really.  The idea is to test free for _exixtence_.  Which only makes 
sense in case of weak symbol support getting involved.  In other 
situations, there could not possibly be a need for a run-time if() test, 
because surely the code could know at build time whether free() exists 
or not.

> Isn't standard 'free' declared to take 1 arg and
> return void?

Yes.  But since the code in question doesn't actually _call_ free, 
that's both irrelevant.

> If you aren't talking standard 'free()', then
> nevermind...

We are talking standard free.  More to the point, we're discussing 
newlib, the package that actually implements free() for cygwin.

>> The only code that might actually be a slight bit better than the given
>>
>>     if (! free)
>>
>> would be
>>
>>     if (0 != free)
>>
>> The function designator `free' auto-decays into a function pointer,
>> which is compared to a null pointer constant: 0.  The ! operator does
>> that same thing implicitly, but is fully equivalent to it.
> ---
> Free autodecays to a function pointer?

In the use case at hand: yes, it does.

> In what language?

Standard C.


--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -