Create accountLogin

Recent searches

No recent searches

Search options

Only available when logged in.
norden.social is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
Moin! Dies ist die Mastodon-Instanz für Nordlichter, Schnacker und alles dazwischen. Folge dem Leuchtturm.

Administered by:

Server stats:

3.6K
active users

norden.social: AboutStatusProfiles directoryPrivacy policy

Mastodon: AboutGet the appKeyboard shortcutsView source codev4.3.7

#clang

3 posts3 participants0 posts today
Public
mort

Is there a way to get #Apple #Clang to warn on aggregate initialization w/ designated initializers in the wrong order? In C++ it's supposed to be illegal to aggregate-initialize a struct in any other order than declaration order, but Clang never warns on that so I don't catch it until CI complains or I try to compile the code on a Linux machine

#LLVM#appleclang
Public
andie :oh_no_bubble:

TIL: C array subscript operators are handled in such a way that `letters[i]` is equivalent to `*(letters + i)` and because addition is commutative, that expression is identical to `*(i + letters)`, which means that `i[letters]` is the same as `letters[i]`.

```
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stddef.h>

int main() {
char letters[3] = "abc";
size_t i = 2;
printf("letters: %p\n", (void *)&letters);
printf("i[letters] (%p): %c\n", (void*)&(i[letters]), i[letters]);
printf("letters[i] (%p): %c\n", (void*)&(letters[i]), letters[i]);
return 0;
}
```

Which outputs:
```
letters: 0x7ffc68ec7bb9
i[letters] (0x7ffc68ec7bbb): c
letters[i] (0x7ffc68ec7bbb): c
```

Mind blown... :neofox_floof_explode:
#til #clang #pointers #programming

ExploreLive feeds
About