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) |
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]
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.