Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote:
cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) writes:
[...]Replying to myself here, but...this is another example of weird[SNIP]
behavior:
>
```
term% cat boo.c
#include <limits.h>
>
int
monstartup(void)
{
return INT_MAX + 1;
}
>
int
main(void)
{
return 0;
}(I admit that I am cheating a bit, but I claim that this program>
is strictly conforming.)
I agree that the program is strictly conforming.
>
I don't know the details, but I think "monstartup" is a special name,
and that the program would behave as expected if a different name
were used. Since "monstartup" is not reserved, an implementation
that visibly treats it specially is not conforming.
That's why it's cheating: `monstartup` is a function called from
the C runtime when using the `gprof` profiler, before `main` is
called, and I just happen to know that the csu code will call a
function by that name if compiled with profiling enabled. Thus,
this program can tickle the UB in `monstartup` in some weird
configurations. This is outside of the domain of strictly
defined C, but it is the sort of thing that happens in the real
world. Caveat emptor.
- Dan C.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.