you are missing
using System;
------------
Scott Doctor
scott at scottdoctor.com
------------------
On 3/21/2016 5:21 PM, J Decker wrote:
> So far I just see analysis tools fail for the same sorts of valid code...
>
> this is a bit of C# but the same idea causes the same warnings and
> there's nothign tecniclally wrong with this.
>
>
>
> class test
> {
> struct large_struct { public int x; }
> bool arbitrary_true_false = true;
> void method()
> {
> bool initialized = false;
> large_struct s;
> if( arbitrary_true_false )
> {
> initialized = true;
> s.x = 1;
> }
> if( initialized )
> {
> Console.WriteLine( "this fails(during compile) as
> uninitialized: {0}", s.x );
> }
> }
> }
>
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 4:35 PM, James K. Lowden
> <jklowden at schemamania.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 13:48:06 -0700
>> Scott Perry <numist at apple.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Compilers allow you to choose your standard; --std=c11 means
>>> something very specific (and unchanging)
>> They do. And that covers what the standard covers. The standard also
>> has limits. It includes constructs that are syntactically permitted
>> but whose behavior is left undefined, known by the scarred as "UB" for
>> "undefined behavior". An example from Clang's discussion is
>>
>> int i = 10 << 31;
>>
>> The standard says << is a shift operator. It places no limit on the
>> number of bits to be shifted. If that number is so large that the
>> product cannot be represented by the assigned variable, that is *not*
>> an error. The standard allows the compiler to do anything or nothing
>> with it. As you may imagine, the varieties of anything and nothing are
>> many.
>>
>> Compiler writers are well aware that "nothing" is faster done than
>> "something". Over time, they have gotten more aggressive in simply
>> deleting UB code. As a consequence, programmers who thought they wrote
>> standards-conforming code get burned when they upgrade/change
>> compilers. Mysterious and sometimes subtle errors are introduced by
>> the compiler for the user's benefit.
>>
>> Your googlefu will turn up lots of discussion. One I liked that wasn't
>> on Page 1:
>>
>>
>> http://blog.frama-c.com/index.php?post/2013/10/09/Overflow-float-integer
>>
>> --jkl
>> _______________________________________________
>> sqlite-users mailing list
>> sqlite-users at mailinglists.sqlite.org
>> http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
> _______________________________________________
> sqlite-users mailing list
> sqlite-users at mailinglists.sqlite.org
> http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
>
>
