Mailing-List: contact dev-help@stdcxx.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <4820B9C3.4080703@roguewave.com>
Date: Tue, 06 May 2008 14:04:19 -0600
From: Martin Sebor <sebor@roguewave.com>
Organization: Rogue Wave Software, Inc.
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080226)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: Null src pointer in memcpy?
References: 
 <CFFDD219128FD94FB4F92B99F52D0A49010A36F0@exchmail01.Blue.Roguewave.Com>
 <47FEBCEC.20609@roguewave.com> <47FEC186.1050901@roguewave.com>
 <CFFDD219128FD94FB4F92B99F52D0A49010A36F4@exchmail01.Blue.Roguewave.Com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CFFDD219128FD94FB4F92B99F52D0A49010A36F4@exchmail01.Blue.Roguewave.Com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Eric Lemings wrote:
>  
> I was just asking because I observed such a call in _rw_bufcat().
> It happens when the printf-like functions in tests/src/printf.cpp
> are creating a new buffer for formatting operations.

Fix it :)

> 
> Brad.
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Martin Sebor [mailto:msebor@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
>> Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2008 7:40 PM
>> To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Null src pointer in memcpy?
>>
>> This is explicitly required in 7.1.4 of C99:
>>
>>        7.1.4 Use of library functions
>>
>>    -1- Each of the following statements applies unless 
>> explicitly stated
>>        otherwise in the detailed descriptions that follow: If 
>> an argument
>>        to a function has an invalid value (such as a value outside the
>>        domain of the function, or a pointer outside the address space
>>        of the program, or a null pointer, or a pointer to 
>> non-modifiable
>>        storage when the corresponding parameter is not 
>> const-qualified)
>>        or a type (after promotion) not expected by a function with
>>        variable number of arguments, the behavior is undefined. ...
>>
>> Here's an answer to the same question on comp.lang.c.moderated:
>>    http://tinyurl.com/6eqo3n
>>
>> Martin Sebor wrote:
>>> Eric Lemings wrote:
>>>>  
>>>> Is it safe to pass a null pointer as the 2nd argument to 
>> memcpy()?  Or
>>>> undefined?
>>> Assuming the third argument is 0. Strictly speaking I believe it's
>>> undefined because memcpy(s1, s2, n) is specified to "copy n bytes
>>> from the object pointed to by s2 into the object pointed to by s1"
>>> and a null pointer doesn't point to an object. An object is defined
>>> as "a region of storage in the execution environment, the contents
>>> of which can represent values."
>>>
>>> AFAIK, most implementations allow null pointers for no-op calls to
>>> memcpy() but gcc issues a warning when it detects at compile time
>>> that a null pointer is passed as the first or second argument to
>>> memcpy().
>>>
>>> Martin
>>>
>>