Re: curiosity singleton pattern?
On Aug 2, 9:36 am, Ian Collins <ian-n...@hotmail.com> wrote:
James Kanze wrote:
On Aug 1, 11:32 am, Ian Collins <ian-n...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Chris Forone wrote:
Ian Collins schrieb:
non static func Print is called by nullpointer?! have gcc 4.1 and
Why not? Don't forget that the object isn't used to call the member
function, which is just a plain old C function with an extra this
parameter, but is passed to the the function as the this parameter. =
your case, this isn't used.
And yet you're wrong. That might be the behavior of the
compiler you're currently using, but it's not guaranteed, and
it's not the behavior of every compiler.
OK, which one is different?
The Green Hills compiler was, when I used it. (I'm not sure
what Green Hills is up to now.) And although I never used it,
from what I understand, the Centerline compiler used "fat"
pointers, and doubtlessly caught such errors as well. It
caught practically all pointer errors.
Way back when, the C committee made a great effort to specify
the language in such a way that all, or almost all, pointer
violations could be tested at runting, and result in run-time
errors, rather than random crashes or wrong results later. The
performance impact for this is fairly large, so it tends not be
done in commercial compilers, but given the improvements in
machine performance and the importance of avoiding such errors
in software connecting to the network, I wouldn't be surprised
if it didn't start appearing, at least as an option.
James Kanze (GABI Software) email:firstname.lastname@example.org
Conseils en informatique orient=E9e objet/
Beratung in objektorientierter Datenverarbeitung
9 place S=E9mard, 78210 St.-Cyr-l'=C9cole, France, +33 (0)1 30 23 00 34