------- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-09-01 05:10 ------- > i should have always used sizeof(mallocArea_ *). since mallocArea_ and > mallocArea_* are the same size, this error is not fatal. (i just printed > them out on linux/i686/gnu and they are both = 4) > > the code snippet in question, which i think is: > > + temp = (mallocArea_ *) ptr; > + *temp = a; > + ptr = ptr + sizeof(mallocArea_*); > > could be better expressed like this: > > *(mallocArea_ *)ptr = a; > ptr = ptr + sizeof(mallocArea_*) > > *ptr then points to the mallocArea a, after which ptr must be incremented to > point to the remaining allocated memory.
I don't understand. The line: *(mallocArea_ *)ptr = a; means that you're writing a mallocArea at the address pointed to by ptr. So you need to skip that area, which is expressed with: ptr = ptr + sizeof(mallocArea_); More generally, the size of the pointer doesn't matter here, only the size of mallocArea_ is of interest since that's what you write ahead of the chunk of memory you return. So I think the correct version is to use sizeof(mallocArea_) everywhere. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17180 ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter.
