Re: Value vs. Const

["Peter Dow" <maillist@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Hans,

That's what I suspected.  Also, afaik, there is no such thing as a read-only
pointer, correct?  So how sophisticated is the compiler's checking for
someone modifying a CONST parm?  Obviously a direct reference to the parm
would be easy to detect.  Would it also catch a reference to
%addr(MyConstParm) as well? Or some attempt to copy the pointer that is
actually passed and use it with a based variable to modify the parm?

Peter Dow
Dow Software Services, Inc.
909 793-9050 voice
909 793-4480 fax
909 522-3214 cell

>Hans wrote:
>optimized to passing a pointer to the original value. >Otherwise, the value
is copied to a compiler-generated >temporary, and the address of that is
passed.

Peter wrote:
>Can you clarify whether the temporary variable is in the caller or the
>procedure?

Hans wrote:
>The caller doesn't have access to the procedure's local automatic storage,
>which isn't even allocated yet! So the storage for the temp is taken from
>the caller's automatic storage.



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.507 / Virus Database: 304 - Release Date: 8/4/2003