Message166943
| Author |
loewis |
| Recipients |
alex, amaury.forgeotdarc, benrg, brian.curtin, eric.araujo, georg.brandl, ishimoto, jackdied, loewis, meador.inge, mrabarnett, ncoghlan, pitrou, r.david.murray, rhettinger, skrah, terry.reedy, tim.golden, vstinner |
| Date |
2012年07月31日.01:46:06 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1343699167.84.0.406847880175.issue8847@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
> Having the compiler merge different pointers just because the functions
> happen to have the same implementation is simply *not cool* from the
> point of view of the CPython code base.
I believe the compiler is completely entitled to do so according to the C language definition. There is no guarantee that two different functions have two different addresses as long as calling the function pointer does the same thing according to the as-if rule.
So we really need to fix Python, not work-around in the compiler. There may be many more compilers which use the same optimisation. Python relying on undefined behavior is simply *not cool*. |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2012年07月31日 01:46:07 | loewis | set | recipients:
+ loewis, georg.brandl, rhettinger, terry.reedy, ishimoto, amaury.forgeotdarc, ncoghlan, pitrou, vstinner, jackdied, tim.golden, eric.araujo, mrabarnett, alex, r.david.murray, brian.curtin, skrah, meador.inge, benrg |
| 2012年07月31日 01:46:07 | loewis | set | messageid: <1343699167.84.0.406847880175.issue8847@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2012年07月31日 01:46:07 | loewis | link | issue8847 messages |
| 2012年07月31日 01:46:06 | loewis | create |
|