On 2011-11-01, Peter Toft p...@linuxbog.dk wrote:
Hi all
Try to find the errors in this C/C++ snippet using valgrind:
#include stdio.h
/* Save as code.c */
int main(void)
{
int i=-1,a[2],b[2],c[2];
a[0] = 1; a[1] = 2;
b[0] = 3; b[1] = 4;
c[0] = 5; c[1] = 6;
printf(%i
On Thu, 3 Nov 2011 11:09:34 + (UTC), Julian Brown wrote:
On
2011-11-01, Peter Toft wrote:
Hi all Try to find the errors in this
C/C++ snippet using valgrind: #include /* Save as code.c */ int
main(void) { int i=-1,a[2],b[2],c[2]; a[0] = 1; a[1] = 2; b[0] = 3; b[1]
= 4; c[0] = 5; c[1] =
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 7:48 AM, Peter Toft p...@linuxbog.dk wrote:
small twist to the code, then gcc -O2 -Wall finds nothing
See the comment - run as code -1
#include stdio.h
#include stdlib.h
/* Save as code.c compile gcc -Wall -O2 o code code.c and run as code
-1 */
int main(int
On Wed, 02 Nov 2011 00:32:44 +, Tom Hughes wrote:
On
01/11/11 22:33, Peter Toft wrote:
Try to find the errors in this
C/C++ snippet using valgrind: #include /* Save as code.c */ int
main(void) { int i=-1,a[2],b[2],c[2]; a[0] = 1; a[1] = 2; b[0] = 3; b[1]
= 4; c[0] = 5; c[1] = 6;
On 02/11/11 07:36, Peter Toft wrote:
Valgrind _does_ point to the problematic area - but finds the problem as
a unitialized values.
Quite possible, depending on how the compiler chooses to arrange the stack.
I did not know that the values I get with my example is different from
32 bit to 64
On 02/11/11 07:41, Peter Toft wrote:
Actually in the future I would wish that memcheck could be extended so
it could catch it - even if it would cost compile-time changes.
Valgrind is a great tool, but its user-value would increase quite a bit,
if it could catch a bit more (e.g. like my
On 02/11/11 10:18, Peter Toft wrote:
I cannot see tha that other two tools do much better on this kind of
coding problem.
I see the same, which did surprise me a little.
Maybe that I do not give valgrind sufficient amount of options. Can you
comment?
Well it is an experimental tool (hence
On Wednesday, November 02, 2011 09:31:18 am Peter Toft wrote:
#include /* Save as code.c */
int main(void) { int
i=-1,a[2],b[2],c[2];
a[0] = 1; a[1] = 2; b[0] = 3; b[1] = 4; c[0] = 5;
c[1] = 6;
printf(%i %in,b[i],a[i]); return 0;
}
I cannot see exp-sgcheck catching anything (compiled
On Wed, 2 Nov 2011 11:56:58 +0100, Julian Seward wrote:
On
Wednesday, November 02, 2011 09:31:18 am Peter Toft wrote:
#include /* Save as code.c */ int main(void) { int i=-1,a[2],b[2],c[2];
a[0] = 1; a[1] = 2; b[0] = 3; b[1] = 4; c[0] = 5; c[1] = 6; printf(%i
%in,b[i],a[i]); return 0; }
On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 11:33:20PM +0100, Peter Toft wrote:
int i=-1,a[2],b[2],c[2];
a[0] = 1; a[1] = 2;
b[0] = 3; b[1] = 4;
c[0] = 5; c[1] = 6;
printf(%i %in,b[i],a[i]);
...
Are there supplementary tools I should check?
There is also mudflap of gcc which claims to catch exactly
On Wed, 2 Nov 2011 13:20:55 +0100, Baurzhan Ismagulov wrote:
On
Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 11:33:20PM +0100, Peter Toft wrote:
int
i=-1,a[2],b[2],c[2]; a[0] = 1; a[1] = 2; b[0] = 3; b[1] = 4; c[0] = 5;
c[1] = 6; printf(%i %in,b[i],a[i]);
...
Are there
supplementary tools I should check?
On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 01:55:50PM +0100, Peter Toft wrote:
There is also mudflap of gcc which claims to catch exactly this sort
of errors.
I might be mistaking here but if the value if i is set from argv
or alike then mudflap cannot help on this problem.
It worked for me for
Hi Baurzhan,
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Baurzhan Ismagulov i...@radix50.net wrote:
On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 01:55:50PM +0100, Peter Toft wrote:
There is also mudflap of gcc which claims to catch exactly this sort
of errors.
I might be mistaking here but if the value if i is set
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 6:55 AM, Baurzhan Ismagulov i...@radix50.net wrote:
On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 09:42:41AM -0400, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
It worked for me for overflows (e.g., i = 2) but not underflows (with -1
as in your original posting), regardless of how i has been set. That's
On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 08:01:34AM -0700, Dan Kegel wrote:
Don't forget about gcc's -fstack-protector-all option. That can find
a few things.
I've already tried this with the OP's example, didn't help.
With kind regards,
Baurzhan.
Hi all
Try to find the errors in this C/C++ snippet using valgrind:
#include stdio.h
/* Save as code.c */
int main(void)
{
int i=-1,a[2],b[2],c[2];
a[0] = 1; a[1] = 2;
b[0] = 3; b[1] = 4;
c[0] = 5; c[1] = 6;
printf(%i %in,b[i],a[i]);
return 0;
}
Compile using gcc -o bla
On 11/01/2011 06:33 PM, Peter Toft wrote:
Hi all
Try to find the errors in this C/C++ snippet using valgrind:
#include stdio.h
/* Save as code.c */
int main(void)
{
int i=-1,a[2],b[2],c[2];
a[0] = 1; a[1] = 2;
b[0] = 3; b[1] = 4;
c[0] = 5; c[1] = 6;
printf(%i
On 01/11/11 22:33, Peter Toft wrote:
Try to find the errors in this C/C++ snippet using valgrind:
#includestdio.h
/* Save as code.c */
int main(void)
{
int i=-1,a[2],b[2],c[2];
a[0] = 1; a[1] = 2;
b[0] = 3; b[1] = 4;
c[0] = 5; c[1] = 6;
printf(%i
18 matches
Mail list logo
