Function definition without compound statement in C - c

I am confused by the following function definition without a compound statement in C:
void
__tu_finishme(const char *file, int line, const char *format, ...)
tu_printflike(3, 4);
It seems to not result in a function in generated object files, while the linker still expects __tu_finishme to have been written.
Especially odd to me since
void
__tu_finishme(const char *file, int line, const char *format, ...) {
tu_printflike(3, 4);
}
seems to have different (AKA "normal") linkage than the former.
Can someone please explain which concept and niche of the C language I encounter here and how it works?
Bonus points for explaining things like:
void
foo(const char* c)
bar()
{
ha = hoo();
boo(ha);
}

tu_printflike is very likely a macro that expands to an attribute like:
__attribute__ ((format (printf, 3, 4)))
The above is GCC specific, so the use of a macro is there to enable portability across compilers, it can be defined as something akin to
#ifdef __GNUC__
# define tu_printflike(i, j) __attribute__ ((format (printf, i, j)))
#else
# define tu_printflike(i, j)
#endif
Your bonus point can be explained just the same with
#define bar()
Where the definition is just an empty token sequence, the function like macro expands to nothing.

Related

Defining a pointer to a function that has an absolute address - C

I have the following function calls:
((int(*)(const char *format, ...))0x0000ab8c)(format, p2)
and
int printf2(const char *format, ...)(format, p2)
I sometimes use the first function, and sometimes the second one, and therefore would like to define a macro that defines both functions but selects one of the definitions according to a boolean definition
#ifdef FIRST
#define print_function(format, ...) ((int(*)(const char *format, ...))0x0000ab8c)(format, __VA_ARGS__)
#else
#define print_function(format, ...) printf2(format, __VA_ARGS__)
#endif
Moreover, I would like to pass those functions as a parameter to another function. Is there any generic solution that could work here?

C string to keep macro definition

I am trying below code using compilers MSVC 2013 and GCC.
#define AV_FFMPEG_SAMPLE( ... )# __VA_ARGS__
const char *function_store = AV_FFMPEG_SAMPLE(
#define BUF_SIZE 65536
#define ALIGN_MASK 0xFF00
int foo()
{
int abc;
int *xyz;
xyz = (int *)malloc(BUF_SIZE);
return (BUF_SIZE & ALIGN_MASK);
}
);
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
printf("%s\n", function_store);
}
MSVC 2013 Output:
#define BUF_SIZE 65536 #define ALIGN_MASK 0xFF00 int foo() {int abc; int *xyz; xyz = (int *)malloc( BUF_SIZE); return (BUF_SIZE & ALIGN_MASK); }
GCC Output:
int foo() { int abc; int *xyz; xyz = (int *)malloc(BUF_SIZE); return
(BUF_SIZE & ALIGN_MASK); }
My preferred output is same as MSVC 2013 output, but I need to get the same using GCC (MinGW). How can I get the output similar to MSVC 2013 output, using GCC (MinGW)?
C specifies of a function-like macro invocation that
If there are sequences of preprocessing tokens within the list of arguments that would otherwise act as preprocessing directives, the behavior is undefined.
(C 2011 6.10.3/11, and identical in C99 6.10.3/11).
That's exactly your situation. Since stringification applies only in the context of a function-like macro replacement list, and behavior is (explicitly) undefined for the case that the macro arguments comprise tokens that otherwise would constitute preprocessing directives, you're pretty much at the mercy of whatever compiler you choose. There is no reliable way to achieve what you say you want.
If what you want most is consistent output regardless of which compiler builds your code, then move the macro definitions out of the scope of the invocation of AV_FFMPEG_SAMPLE().
Frankly, although I don't have much regard for VS 2013 from a standards-conformance perspective, I tend to think more highly of GCC. Does it not warn about your code?

typeof uses in C, besides macros

It's well known the use of typeof in Macros to make them type independent, such as container_of() and many other macros from the Linux kernel. It is unarguable that the typeof keyword unleashes a lot of power when used in these macros.
This question is about further use of the typeof keyword. What other contexts could the keyword bring lots of gain in C code, besides Macros?
One use of typeof is to const-cast a 2-dimensional array. In gcc, the construct:
extern void foo(const int a[2][2]); // or equivalently a[][2]
int a[2][2];
foo(a);
will generate:
"warning: passing argument 1 of 'foo' from incompatible pointer type".
(See http://c-faq.com/ansi/constmismatch.html for the reason why.) One way to fix this is to use a sledge-hammer-like cast, such as:
foo((void *)a);
Such a cast will happily take whatever you, perhaps mistakenly, give it.
But we can be much more delicate. By using the casting-macro CONST_CAST_2D given in the following code sample, the warning is eliminated. And more importantly, if you try to apply it to anything other than a 2-D array, you will get a compiler error/warning. CONST_CAST_PP works similarly, for a pointer-to-a-pointer.
#define CONST_CAST_2D(x) ((const typeof((x)[0][0])(*)[countof((x)[0])])(x))
#define CONST_CAST_PP(x) ((const typeof(**(x))**)(x))
#define countof(x) (sizeof(x) / sizeof 0[x]) // semi-standard define
static void foo(const int a[][2]) {} // takes const
static void bar(const int **b) {} // takes const
int main(void) {
int a[2][2]; // non-const
int **b; // non-const
foo(CONST_CAST_2D(a)); // ok
bar(CONST_CAST_PP(b)); // ok
return 0;
}
CONST_CAST_PP provides a clean and robust solution to a commonly-asked problem, e.g.:
Double pointer const-correctness warnings in C
c compiler warning when passing a char *arr[] to a function as const char **arr
What type is the reference to an array variable?
const cast and pointers to pointers
Why it's not safe to cast `char **` to `const char **`?
Why does implicit conversion from non-const to const not happen here?
Intel C++ Compiler warning 167 when non-const argument is passed as const parameter
And CONST_CAST_2D resolves:
How to eliminate warning for passing multidimensional array as const multidimensional array?
C function const multidimensional-array argument strange warning
A second usage of typeof is to generate pointers to constants, or pointers to function return values, as shown in the following example:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <time.h>
#include <sys/socket.h>
#define AMPERSAND(x) (&(typeof(x)){x})
int main(void) {
printf("%s\n", ctime(AMPERSAND(time(0)))); // pointer to time_t
setsockopt(0, SOL_SOCKET, SO_REUSEADDR, AMPERSAND(1), sizeof 1);
return 0;
}
This allows for straight-forward function composition, rather than having to save temporaries in named variables. (Unfortunately this doesn't extend to g++.)
Some people (myself included) dislike the syntax of the C++ const_cast<> operator, because;
It seems misnamed, because it removes const.
It seems to violate DRY, because it requires a redundant type arg.
But I am wrong: it is not misnamed, since it can also add const and/or volatile "cv" qualifiers, and it only partially violates DRY, since the compiler will catch any errors. So I dislike it slightly less and use it: it is safer than the C-style cast.
Using gcc's typeof, you can have almost the same type safety in C.
The following C code sample gives a CONST_CAST(T, x) macro, and illustrates its use:
#define REMOVE_QUALIFIER(cv, T, x) /* this macro evaluates its args only once */ \
__builtin_choose_expr(__builtin_types_compatible_p(typeof(x), cv T), ((T)(x)), \
(void)0)
#define ADD_QUALIFIER(cv, T, x) /* this macro evaluates its args only once */ \
__builtin_choose_expr(__builtin_types_compatible_p(typeof(x), T), ((cv T)(x)), \
(void)0)
#ifdef __GNUC__
#define CONST_CAST(T, x) REMOVE_QUALIFIER(const, T, x) // "misnamed"
#else
#define CONST_CAST(T, x) ((T)(x)) // fallback to standard C cast
#endif
void foo(void);
void foo(void) {
const int *a = 0;
const float *x = 0;
int *b = a; // warning
int *c = (int *)a; // no warning, unsafe standard cast
int *d = (int *)x; // no warning, and likely wrong
int *e = CONST_CAST(int *, a); // ok
int *f = CONST_CAST(int *, x); // error
unsigned *g = CONST_CAST(unsigned *, a); // error
const int **h = &b; // warning
const int **i = ADD_QUALIFIER(const, int **, &b); // ok
const int **j = ADD_QUALIFIER(const, int **, &x); // error
}
This technique can also be used to change the signedness of a type, reminiscent of C++'s std::make_signed and std::make_unsigned, or Boost traits. For example:
#define MAKE_UNSIGNED(T, x) ADD_QUALIFIER(unsigned, T, x) // T usually char*
This use of gcc's typeof is yet another reinterpret cast, using union-punning.
It can be applied to scalars and structures, as well as to pointers. It gives only an R-value.
#ifdef __GNUC__
#define PUN_CAST(T, x) (((union {typeof(x) src; T dst;})(x)).dst)
#else
#define PUN_CAST(T, x) (*(T*)&(x)) //<-- classic pun: breaks strict aliasing rules
#endif
Caveat: you can use this to cast a pointer into an array of 4 or 8 bytes, or vice versa. But you can't use it to cast a pointer into another pointer, in an attempt to avoid the strict aliasing rules.

Typechecking macro arguments in C

Is it possible to typecheck arguments to a #define macro? For example:
typedef enum
{
REG16_A,
REG16_B,
REG16_C
}REG16;
#define read_16(reg16) read_register_16u(reg16); \
assert(typeof(reg16)==typeof(REG16));
The above code doesn't seem to work. What am I doing wrong?
BTW, I am using gcc, and I can guarantee that I will always be using gcc in this project. The code does not need to be portable.
gcc supports typeof
e.g. a typesafe min macro taken from the linux kernel
#define min(x,y) ({ \
typeof(x) _x = (x); \
typeof(y) _y = (y); \
(void) (&_x == &_y); \
_x < _y ? _x : _y; })
but it doesn't allow you to compare two types. Note though the pointer comparison which Will generate a warning - you can do a typecheck like this (also from the linux kernel)
#define typecheck(type,x) \
({ type __dummy; \
typeof(x) __dummy2; \
(void)(&__dummy == &__dummy2); \
1; \
})
Presumably you could do something similar - i.e. compare pointers to the arguments.
The typechecking in C is a bit loose for integer-related types; but you can trick the compiler by using the fact that most pointer types are incompatible.
So
#define CHECK_TYPE(var,type) { __typeof(var) *__tmp; __tmp = (type *)NULL; }
This will give a warning, "assignment from incompatible pointer type" if the types aren't the same. For example
typedef enum { A1,B1,C1 } my_enum_t;
int main (int argc, char *argv) {
my_enum_t x;
int y;
CHECK_TYPE(x,my_enum_t); // passes silently
CHECK_TYPE(y,my_enum_t); // assignment from incompatible pointer type
}
I'm sure that there's some way to get a compiler error for this.
This is an old question, But I believe I have a general answer that according to Compiler Explorer apears to work on MSVC, gcc and clang.
#define CHECK_TYPE(type,var) { typedef void (*type_t)(type); type_t tmp = (type_t)0; if(0) tmp(var);}
In each case the compiler generates a useful error message if the type is incompatible. This is because it imposes the same type checking rules used for function parameters.
It can even be used multiple times within the same scope without issue. This part surprises me somewhat. (I thought I would have to utilize "__LINE__" to get this behavior)
Below is the complete test I ran, commented out lines all generate errors.
#include <stdio.h>
#define CHECK_TYPE(type,var) { typedef void (*type_t)(type); type_t tmp = (type_t)0; if(0) tmp(var);}
typedef struct test_struct
{
char data;
} test_t;
typedef struct test2_struct
{
char data;
} test2_t;
typedef enum states
{
STATE0,
STATE1
} states_t;
int main(int argc, char ** argv)
{
test_t * var = NULL;
int i;
states_t s;
float f;
CHECK_TYPE(void *, var); //will pass for any pointer type
CHECK_TYPE(test_t *, var);
//CHECK_TYPE(int, var);
//CHECK_TYPE(int *, var);
//CHECK_TYPE(test2_t, var);
//CHECK_TYPE(test2_t *, var);
//CHECK_TYPE(states_t, var);
CHECK_TYPE(int, i);
//CHECK_TYPE(void *, i);
CHECK_TYPE(int, s); //int can be implicitly used instead of enum
//CHECK_TYPE(void *, s);
CHECK_TYPE(float, s); //MSVC warning only, gcc and clang allow promotion
//CHECK_TYPE(float *, s);
CHECK_TYPE(float, f);
//CHECK_TYPE(states_t, f);
printf("hello world\r\n");
}
In each case the compiler with -O1 and above did remove all traces of the macro in the resulting code.
With -O0 MSVC left the call to the function at zero in place, but it was rapped in an unconditional jump which means this shouldn't be a concern. gcc and clang with -O0 both remove everything except for the stack initialization of the tmp variable to zero.
No, macros can't provide you any typechecking. But, after all, why macro? You can write a static inline function which (probably) will be inlined by the compiler - and here you will have type checking.
static inline void read_16(REG16 reg16) {
read_register_16u(reg16);
}
Building upon Zachary Vander Klippe's answer, we might even go a step further (in a portable way, even though that wasn't a requirement) and additionally make sure that the size of the passed-in type matches the size of the passed-in variable using the "negative array length" trick that was commonly used for implementing static assertions in C (prior to C11, of course, which does provide the new _Static_assert keyword).
As an added benefit, let's throw in some const compatibility.
#define CHECK_TYPE(type,var) \
do {\
typedef void (*type_t) (const type);\
type_t tmp = (type_t)(NULL);\
typedef char sizes[((sizeof (type) == sizeof (var)) * 2) - 1];\
if (0) {\
const sizes tmp2;\
(void) tmp2;\
tmp (var);\
}\
} while (0)
Referencing the new typedef as a variable named tmp2 (and, additionally, referencing this variable, too) is just a method to make sure that we don't generate more warnings than necessary, c.f., -Wunused-local-typedefs and the like. We could have used __attribute__ ((unused)) instead, but that is non-portable.
This will work around the integer promotion "issue" in the original example.
Example in the same spirit, failing statements are commented out:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#define CHECK_TYPE(type,var) \
do {\
typedef void (*type_t) (const type);\
type_t tmp = (type_t)(NULL);\
typedef char sizes[((sizeof (type) == sizeof (var)) * 2) - 1];\
if (0) {\
const sizes tmp2;\
(void) tmp2;\
tmp (var);\
}\
} while (0)
int main (int argc, char **argv) {
long long int ll;
char c;
//CHECK_TYPE(char, ll);
//CHECK_TYPE(long long int, c);
printf("hello world\n");
return EXIT_SUCCESS);
}
Naturally, even that approach isn't able to catch all issues. For instance, checking signedness is difficult and often relies on tricks assuming that a specific complement variant (e.g., two's complement) is being used, so cannot be done generically. Even less so if the type can be a structure.
To continue the idea of ulidtko, take an inline function and have it return something:
inline
bool isREG16(REG16 x) {
return true;
}
With such as thing you can do compile time assertions:
typedef char testit[sizeof(isREG16(yourVariable))];
No. Macros in C are inherently type-unsafe and trying to check for types in C is fraught with problems.
First, macros are expanded by textual substitution in a phase of compilation where no type information is available. For that reason, it is utterly impossible for the compiler to check the type of the arguments when it does macro expansion.
Secondly, when you try to perform the check in the expanded code, like the assert in the question, your check is deferred to runtime and will also trigger on seemingly harmless constructs like
a = read_16(REG16_A);
because the enumerators (REG16_A, REG16_B and REG16_C) are of type int and not of type REG16.
If you want type safety, your best bet is to use a function. If your compiler supports it, you can declare the function inline, so the compiler knows you want to avoid the function-call overhead wherever possible.

#define and functions with variable length arguments

I have zillions of my_printf() function calls in a huge program. I now want to convert them all so that the function takes a new integer argument (call it x) without having to edit the zillions of calls. If my_printf only ever took exactly one string argument then I could do something like this:
#define my_printf(str) _my_printf(x,str)
void _my_printf(int x,char *str) // changed from my_printf(char *str)
{
// stuff
}
But as my_printf takes a variable number of arguments I'm not sure how to do it. Can it be done?
EDIT: for those wondering why I should want to do such a thing, here's a related example:
#if BELT_AND_BRACES_DIAGNOSTIC_MODE
#define function(x) _function(__FILE__,__LINE__,x)
#else // speed critical optimised mode
#define function(x) _function(x)
#endif
#if BELT_AND_BRACES_DIAGNOSTIC_MODE
void _function(char *file,int line,int x)
#else
void _function(int x)
#endif
{
// stuff
#if BELT_AND_BRACES_DIAGNOSTIC_MODE
if (something_went_wrong)
{
printf("Cock up in function when called from %s line %d\n",file,line);
}
#endif
}
You may use C99 variadic macros:
#define my_printf(...) my_printf_(x, __VA_ARGS__)
As Microsoft's implementation suppresse trailing commas, the str argument can be added explicitly
#define my_printf(str, ...) my_printf_(x, str, __VA_ARGS__)
but this would lead to a syntax error in standard C when invoked without variadic arguments
my_printf("foo")
or an empty argument list
my_printf("foo",)
Therefore, I'd go with the first version.
If the code can be compiled as C99 code, you can define a variadic macro
#define my_printf(str, args...) _my_printf(x, str, ##__VA_ARGS__)
The preprocessor will replace the arguments ... and the GNU preprocessor will remove the trailing comma in case the macro is invoked only with the str argument.
The best thing is of course to bite the bullet and edit the code. Otherwise you're creating a "mystery", that needs to be solved by all future maintainers of the code. Even if that's only you, this is exactly the kind of clever trick that you will forget all about. It sucks to come back, and be puzzled by strange pointless-seeming macros.
That said, if you're using a GNU toolchain, you can perhaps look into using varargs macros.
Not with standard C89 macros, you can't. However you can get the same effect using functions, by breaking out the main part of your my_printf function into a vmy_printf function, analagous to the standard vprintf:
#include <stdarg.h>
int vmy_printf(int x, const char *format, va_list ap)
{
/* main body of my_printf goes here, taking its varargs from ap */
}
/* new_my_printf(), for callers who know about the x parameter */
int new_my_printf(int x, const char *format, ...)
{
int n;
va_list ap;
va_start(ap, format);
n = vmy_printf(x, format, ap);
va_end(ap);
return n;
}
/* my_printf(), for the old callers who don't know about x */
int my_printf(const char *format, ...)
{
int n;
va_list ap;
va_start(ap, format);
n = vmy_printf(DEFAULT_X, format, ap);
va_end(ap);
return n;
}
(This kind of thing is why those v... versions of all the standard varargs functions exist.)
If my_printf already takes a variable number of arguments, I'm not sure why you need to wrap 'one more argument' in a macro... Just insert the new calls with the extra argument and be done with it; the old calls should still work as expected.
A simple solution to this problem is...
#define my_printf(x) printf x
(note the missing braces)
To call it, use:
my_printf((any number of arguments))
(note the double braces)

Resources