Re: Memory protection between compilation units?

Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> wrote:

On 2025-06-15, Waldek Hebisch <antispam@fricas.org> wrote:

Mateusz Viste <mateusz@not.gonna.tell> wrote:

 
That said, detecting out-of-bounds array access is no panacea. Memory
corruption can arise from various sources, such as dangling pointers or
poorly managed pointer arithmetic.

>
AFAICS there is no reason for explicit pointer arithmetic in well
written C programs.

 
LOL, you heard it here.
 

Implicit pointer arithmetic (coming from array
indexing) is done by compiler so should be no problem.  Like in

 
Array indexing *is* pointer arithmetic.
 
Are you not aware of this equivalence?
 
   (E1)[(E2)]   <--->  *((E1) + (E2))
 

Learn to read.

In fact, let's draw the commutative diagram
 
   (E1)[(E2)]   <--->  *((E1) + (E2))
      ^                     ^
      |                     |
      |                     |
      v                     v
   (E2)[(E1)]   <--->  *((E2) + (E1))
 
You're not saying anything here other than that you like the p[i]
/notation/ better than *(p + i), and &p[i] better than p + i.

The indexing notation at least have chance of being automatically
checked (in cases when compiler/checker knows array size).  With arbitrary
user-written pointer arithmetic there is no hope of automatic checking.

--
                              Waldek Hebisch