@johnregehr @RichFelker @ch3root @spun_off ...it doesn't guarantee anything if you do any math on the [u]intptr_t value in the middle.
@RichFelker @johnregehr @ch3root @spun_off The standard says only that given a uintptr_t converted from pointer, you can recover pointer.
-
-
@BRIAN_____@johnregehr@RichFelker @spun_off Right. That's why I like one conv (ptr->uint) more than two (ptr->uint & uint->ptr). -
@BRIAN_____@johnregehr@RichFelker @spun_off The difference is not that big given ptr->uint conv is impl-def anyway. -
@BRIAN_____@johnregehr@RichFelker @spun_off But mappings are "intended to be consistent with the addressing structure of the exec. env.". -
@ch3root@johnregehr@RichFelker @spun_off Thank you for this. I appreciate the quote and I learned something from this.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@BRIAN_____@johnregehr@ch3root @spun_off Yes. But you need to understand "a uintptr_t converted from a pointer" is a _value_. -
@BRIAN_____@johnregehr@ch3root @spun_off You can recover the ptr as long as you have that value. Ways of keeping the value are limitless.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.