Safe Pointers at the Intermediate Language or Hardware Level

seimarao@gmail.com
Mon, 10 Feb 2014 09:11:38 -0800 (PST)

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
Safe Pointers at the Intermediate Language or Hardware Level seimarao@gmail.com (2014-02-10)
Re: Safe Pointers at the Intermediate Language or Hardware Level flaps@dgp.toronto.edu (2014-02-11)
Re: Safe Pointers at the Intermediate Language or Hardware Level gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2014-02-11)
Re: Safe Pointers at the Intermediate Language or Hardware Level ivan@ootbcomp.com (Ivan Godard) (2014-02-10)
Re: Safe Pointers at the Intermediate Language or Hardware Level wclodius@earthlink.net (2014-02-10)
Re: Safe Pointers at the Intermediate Language or Hardware Level seimarao@gmail.com (Seima Rao) (2014-02-11)
Re: Safe Pointers at the Intermediate Language or Hardware Level ivan@ootbcomp.com (Ivan Godard) (2014-02-12)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: seimarao@gmail.com
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 09:11:38 -0800 (PST)
Organization: Compilers Central
Keywords: code, design, comment
Posted-Date: 10 Feb 2014 19:11:02 EST

Hi,


        Its been a long time since Java & .Net introduced safe address
        types to the computing world.


        My question is have we settled on what could be a proper representation
        for safe pointers ?


        Some Mainframes like the 390 have historically supported safe pointers,
        I remember.


Sincerely,
Seima Rao.
[I looked at my S/390 Principles of Operation, and I see a bunch of stuff
for tracing, but nothing that looks like safe pointers. I'd think it was
hardware dependent, e.g., if a machine has a fairly clean and efficient
trap for an unmapped zero address, you'd use that, but if it doesn't, you'd
do something else. -John]


Post a followup to this message

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