Linus Torvalds on aliasing

Post by loa-in-backup » Fri, Jun 08, 2018, 9:27 AM UTC

ufo wrote: post #92

comex wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is against the rules. To fix that, you'd need to put a field of type 'struct Base' in the derived struct(s) rather than just copying its fields. edit: If you want to keep the existing syntax and can use GCC extensions, it should be legal to use an unnamed union: struct Derived1 { union { struct Base base; struct { int a; int b; int c; }; }; int d; int e; }; edit2: or, with -fms-extensions, just struct Derived1 { s…

Putting a field of type 'struct Base' adds extra padding in my case, unfortunately.

Post by Veedrac » Fri, Jun 08, 2018, 9:27 AM UTC

ufo wrote: post #41

I work with a codebase that implements a sort of OO inheritance in C. It looks like this: #define BASE_FIELDS int a; int b; int c; struct Base { BASE_FIELDS }; struct Derived1 { BASE_FIELDS int d; int e; }; struct Derived2 { BASE_FIELDS int f; int g; }; Then, it has lots of code that accesses Derived objects through a `Base*`, with ->a and so on. Is this against the standard C aliasing rules? If so, how would this ne…

Post by dgoldstein0 » Fri, Jun 08, 2018, 9:29 AM UTC

cryon wrote: post #141

mosselman wrote: post #119

I would go out of my way to avoid people who communicate like this with me. People put time and energy in making software better, at least in their own eyes, for others and then they get textually abused like this by someone who has his fame to protect himself with. He also does no service to his own arguments by peppering them with childish swearing because things like "So standards are not some kind of holy book th…

I can't stand when you're expected to wrap every sentence in some sugar coated fake 'niceness' just to not step on somebody's toes. If I have a certain way of expressing myself... Well that's how it is.

Post by zwischenzug » Fri, Jun 08, 2018, 9:31 AM UTC

richmarr wrote: post #149

zwischenzug wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My wife works in mental health, dealing with people at the very lowest ebb. You'd think the therapists' internal meetings would be full of carefully worded and graded polite discussion, but just yesterday she told me about a meeting where the lead therapist said to one particular member of the group, 'If you don't do X right, we're fucked. You are fucking us up!' I don't know if that's good or not, but it's not just…

Presumably your wife is dealing with complex issues where there are real conflicts that require real words, unlike this situation. This is a non-conflict that Torvalds turned into one. In this case, Torvalds is swearing at someone who agrees with him (see Andy Shevchenko's response) because he hasn't bothered to seek clarification before calling it "pure and utter garbage".

   Yeah, there were few reasons why I decide to make that patch (OK, it seems I staked on not the best reason).

Post by ThJ » Fri, Jun 08, 2018, 9:36 AM UTC

ralfn wrote: post #124

mosselman wrote: post #119

I would go out of my way to avoid people who communicate like this with me. People put time and energy in making software better, at least in their own eyes, for others and then they get textually abused like this by someone who has his fame to protect himself with. He also does no service to his own arguments by peppering them with childish swearing because things like "So standards are not some kind of holy book th…

When it comes to being oversensitive needy little things there is no true Scottsman. As a northern European I find it not only comfortable that Linus runs Linux, but I would be less comfortable if it was another American smile in face pretend to be your friend but be shady as fuck attitude that you guys seem to confuse for 'professionalism'. So let's chalk this to cultural differences. We wouldn't hire someone like y…