Re: whats wrong with analysizing pointers this way ?

Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich@compuserve.de>
20 Feb 2006 19:45:10 -0500

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
whats wrong with analysizing pointers this way ? drizzle76@gmail.com (dz) (2006-02-19)
Re: whats wrong with analysizing pointers this way ? DrDiettrich@compuserve.de (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2006-02-20)
Re: whats wrong with analysizing pointers this way ? jvorbrueggen-not@mediasec.de (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jan_Vorbr=FCggen?=) (2006-02-24)
Re: whats wrong with analysizing pointers this way ? shreyas76@gmail.com (shrey) (2006-02-24)
Re: whats wrong with analysizing pointers this way ? david.thompson1@worldnet.att.net (Dave Thompson) (2006-03-05)
Re: whats wrong with analysizing pointers this way ? jvorbrueggen@mediasec.de (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jan_Vorbr=FCggen?=) (2006-03-11)
| List of all articles for this month |

From: Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich@compuserve.de>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 20 Feb 2006 19:45:10 -0500
Organization: Compilers Central
References: 06-02-133
Keywords: analysis

dz wrote:


> I consider pointers pointing to a universe of variables whose
> address is taken, that includes variables that has been passed as
> parameters to functions, parameters whose address has been taken inside
> that function. For functions, that have calls to malloc the universe
> includes an additional generic element "heap"


Then, in a second step, introduce variables of type "pointer".


Where "pointer" does not only mean, that such variables contain
addresses, that's just a convention. You also must open the can of
worms, by allowing access to memory locations, using the *values* stored
in pointer variables, and by introducing pointer arithmetic, so that
references can end up in some variable near the variable pointed to, or
in unallocated memory.


Pointers are harmless, unless they are used. Then they establish worm
holes throughout your universe, or even out of it ;-)


DoDi



Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.