🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Dec15.162202.11231@ucc.su.OZ.AU> John (Max) Skaller writes:
> In article <1992Dec11.230534.10499@microsoft.com> Jim Adcock writes:
> >No more nor less than any other virtual memory OS that allows
> >multiply mapped pages.  Since there is no functionality in the
> >language requiring such multiply mapped pages, you only get in
> >this situation by invoking some system dependency, in which case
> >you are making use of implementation dependencies.

> But Jim, it is not implementation defined, it is required that 
> pointers to the same object compare equal.

> It is therefore not
> allowed to do this sort of memory mapping in C++ behind the scenes,
> which is what I'm concerned with...we actually want to.

It makes me uneasy, but I think Jim Adcock is correct: an implementation
can define an extension, such as memory mapping, which overrides the usual
execution time rules of C/C++, including the rule that pointers to the same
object compare equal.  The rule that 1+1==2 would likewise be subject to
"extension".

Nevertheless, the C standard implies that the onus is on the invoker of memory 
mapping to be aware of libraries and other code which may rely on the usual
execution time rules of C/C++, such as the rule that pointers to the same
object compare equal.  If we don't want libraries to make that assumption,
then John (Max) Skaller is also correct to say

> So the question is really whether the requirement that pointers to
> the same object compare equal should be left implementation defined.
--
Prescott K. Turner, Jr.
Liant Software Corp. (developers of LPI languages)
959 Concord St., Framingham, MA 01701 USA    (508) 872-8700
UUCP: uunet!lpi!pkt                          Internet: pkt@lpi.liant.com