| Copyright (C) 2000-2022 Free Software Foundation, Inc. |
| |
| This file is intended to contain a few notes about writing C code |
| within GCC so that it compiles without error on the full range of |
| compilers GCC needs to be able to compile on. |
| |
| The problem is that many ISO-standard constructs are not accepted by |
| either old or buggy compilers, and we keep getting bitten by them. |
| This knowledge until now has been sparsely spread around, so I |
| thought I'd collect it in one useful place. Please add and correct |
| any problems as you come across them. |
| |
| I'm going to start from a base of the ISO C90 standard, since that is |
| probably what most people code to naturally. Obviously using |
| constructs introduced after that is not a good idea. |
| |
| For the complete coding style conventions used in GCC, please read |
| http://gcc.gnu.org/codingconventions.html |
| |
| |
| String literals |
| --------------- |
| |
| Some compilers like MSVC++ have fairly low limits on the maximum |
| length of a string literal; 509 is the lowest we've come across. You |
| may need to break up a long printf statement into many smaller ones. |
| |
| |
| Empty macro arguments |
| --------------------- |
| |
| ISO C (6.8.3 in the 1990 standard) specifies the following: |
| |
| If (before argument substitution) any argument consists of no |
| preprocessing tokens, the behavior is undefined. |
| |
| This was relaxed by ISO C99, but some older compilers emit an error, |
| so code like |
| |
| #define foo(x, y) x y |
| foo (bar, ) |
| |
| needs to be coded in some other way. |
| |
| |
| Avoid unnecessary test before free |
| ---------------------------------- |
| |
| Since SunOS 4 stopped being a reasonable portability target, |
| (which happened around 2007) there has been no need to guard |
| against "free (NULL)". Thus, any guard like the following |
| constitutes a redundant test: |
| |
| if (P) |
| free (P); |
| |
| It is better to avoid the test.[*] |
| Instead, simply free P, regardless of whether it is NULL. |
| |
| [*] However, if your profiling exposes a test like this in a |
| performance-critical loop, say where P is nearly always NULL, and |
| the cost of calling free on a NULL pointer would be prohibitively |
| high, consider using __builtin_expect, e.g., like this: |
| |
| if (__builtin_expect (ptr != NULL, 0)) |
| free (ptr); |
| |
| |
| |
| Trigraphs |
| --------- |
| |
| You weren't going to use them anyway, but some otherwise ISO C |
| compliant compilers do not accept trigraphs. |
| |
| |
| Suffixes on Integer Constants |
| ----------------------------- |
| |
| You should never use a 'l' suffix on integer constants ('L' is fine), |
| since it can easily be confused with the number '1'. |
| |
| |
| Common Coding Pitfalls |
| ====================== |
| |
| errno |
| ----- |
| |
| errno might be declared as a macro. |
| |
| |
| Implicit int |
| ------------ |
| |
| In C, the 'int' keyword can often be omitted from type declarations. |
| For instance, you can write |
| |
| unsigned variable; |
| |
| as shorthand for |
| |
| unsigned int variable; |
| |
| There are several places where this can cause trouble. First, suppose |
| 'variable' is a long; then you might think |
| |
| (unsigned) variable |
| |
| would convert it to unsigned long. It does not. It converts to |
| unsigned int. This mostly causes problems on 64-bit platforms, where |
| long and int are not the same size. |
| |
| Second, if you write a function definition with no return type at |
| all: |
| |
| operate (int a, int b) |
| { |
| ... |
| } |
| |
| that function is expected to return int, *not* void. GCC will warn |
| about this. |
| |
| Implicit function declarations always have return type int. So if you |
| correct the above definition to |
| |
| void |
| operate (int a, int b) |
| ... |
| |
| but operate() is called above its definition, you will get an error |
| about a "type mismatch with previous implicit declaration". The cure |
| is to prototype all functions at the top of the file, or in an |
| appropriate header. |
| |
| Char vs unsigned char vs int |
| ---------------------------- |
| |
| In C, unqualified 'char' may be either signed or unsigned; it is the |
| implementation's choice. When you are processing 7-bit ASCII, it does |
| not matter. But when your program must handle arbitrary binary data, |
| or fully 8-bit character sets, you have a problem. The most obvious |
| issue is if you have a look-up table indexed by characters. |
| |
| For instance, the character '\341' in ISO Latin 1 is SMALL LETTER A |
| WITH ACUTE ACCENT. In the proper locale, isalpha('\341') will be |
| true. But if you read '\341' from a file and store it in a plain |
| char, isalpha(c) may look up character 225, or it may look up |
| character -31. And the ctype table has no entry at offset -31, so |
| your program will crash. (If you're lucky.) |
| |
| It is wise to use unsigned char everywhere you possibly can. This |
| avoids all these problems. Unfortunately, the routines in <string.h> |
| take plain char arguments, so you have to remember to cast them back |
| and forth - or avoid the use of strxxx() functions, which is probably |
| a good idea anyway. |
| |
| Another common mistake is to use either char or unsigned char to |
| receive the result of getc() or related stdio functions. They may |
| return EOF, which is outside the range of values representable by |
| char. If you use char, some legal character value may be confused |
| with EOF, such as '\377' (SMALL LETTER Y WITH UMLAUT, in Latin-1). |
| The correct choice is int. |
| |
| A more subtle version of the same mistake might look like this: |
| |
| unsigned char pushback[NPUSHBACK]; |
| int pbidx; |
| #define unget(c) (assert(pbidx < NPUSHBACK), pushback[pbidx++] = (c)) |
| #define get(c) (pbidx ? pushback[--pbidx] : getchar()) |
| ... |
| unget(EOF); |
| |
| which will mysteriously turn a pushed-back EOF into a SMALL LETTER Y |
| WITH UMLAUT. |
| |
| |
| Other common pitfalls |
| --------------------- |
| |
| o Expecting 'plain' char to be either sign or unsigned extending. |
| |
| o Shifting an item by a negative amount or by greater than or equal to |
| the number of bits in a type (expecting shifts by 32 to be sensible |
| has caused quite a number of bugs at least in the early days). |
| |
| o Expecting ints shifted right to be sign extended. |
| |
| o Modifying the same value twice within one sequence point. |
| |
| o Host vs. target floating point representation, including emitting NaNs |
| and Infinities in a form that the assembler handles. |
| |
| o qsort being an unstable sort function (unstable in the sense that |
| multiple items that sort the same may be sorted in different orders |
| by different qsort functions). |
| |
| o Passing incorrect types to fprintf and friends. |
| |
| o Adding a function declaration for a module declared in another file to |
| a .c file instead of to a .h file. |