Re: Nested functions [was Re: valgrind]

2022-03-28 Thread Chris Hanson
On Mar 24, 2022, at 8:16 PM, Mouse wrote: > Nested functions are not closures, or at least not what I know as > closures. A nested function pointer (conceptually) goes invalid as > soon as anything it refers to goes out of scope, or at the latest as > soon as its smallest enclosing block exits (

Re: Nested functions [was Re: valgrind]

2022-03-25 Thread David Holland
On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 11:16:58PM -0400, Mouse wrote: > > The conclusion over the past ~25 years has been that there isn't; > > qsort and things like it work "well enough" and real uses for > > closures that really motivate the feature come up rarely enough that > > it doesn't happen. > > N

Re: Nested functions [was Re: valgrind]

2022-03-24 Thread Mouse
> [...] said, moving to fat function pointers on machines that don't > already use them is a real ABI change and therefore a big deal; but > it could be done if there were a compelling argument to justify going > through all the associated dark rituals. Or as a private experiment, in which compati

Re: Nested functions [was Re: valgrind]

2022-03-24 Thread David Holland
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 09:16:36PM -0400, Mouse wrote: > Indeed, you can have different sizes for pointers to different object > types, too. I _think_ pointers to different function types can have > different sizes, but I'm less certain of that. (There would be little > point, since all funct

Nested functions [was Re: valgrind]

2022-03-22 Thread Mouse
>> Can't you? Does C require function pointers to have the same type, >> or compatible structure, as data pointers? > No, I don't think that it does. Correct. > You could have different sizes for those. Indeed, you can have different sizes for pointers to different object types, too. I _think_

Re: nested functions [was Re: valgrind]

2022-03-22 Thread Koning, Paul
> On Mar 22, 2022, at 2:23 PM, Mouse wrote: > > > [EXTERNAL EMAIL] > >>> I found an interesting article about why they're bad... >>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://thephd.dev/lambdas-nested-functions-block-expressions-oh-my__;!!LpKI!1zB1gatUTEiM-j9CQ_6N-NWd4jS8UvW5iTSMRgW1tEyW_mK0mG2pU

nested functions [was Re: valgrind]

2022-03-22 Thread Mouse
>> I found an interesting article about why they're bad... >> https://thephd.dev/lambdas-nested-functions-block-expressions-oh-my > That's a good argument for why GCC's implementation of nested functions is b$ What security blunder is that? Based on your next line, I'm going to assume it's "imple