On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 9:43 PM Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> + * - The conditional operator ("... ? ... : ...") returns the type of the
> + * operand that isn't a null pointer constant. This behavior is the
Perhaps clarify that this happens only if it fits that case? ...
> + * - If (x) is an integer constant expression, then the "* 0l" resolves it
> + * into a null pointer constant, which forces the conditional operator
> + * to return the type of the last operand: "(int *)".
> + * - If (x) is not an integer constant expression, then the type of the
> + * conditional operator is from the first operand: "(void *)".
... i.e. this one happens because it is specified as returning a
pointer to void (one could read it as returning the type of the first
operand).
What about something like:
- The behavior (including its return type) of the conditional
operator ("... ? ... : ...") depends on the kind of expressions given
for the second and third operands. This is the central mechanism of
the macro.
- If (x) is an integer constant expression, then the "* 0l" resolves
it into a null pointer constant. When one operand is a null pointer
constant and the other is a pointer, the conditional operator returns
the type of the pointer operand; that is, "int *".
- If (x) is not an integer constant expression, then that operand is
a pointer to void (but not a null pointer constant). When one operand
is a pointer to void and the other a pointer to an object type, the
conditional operator returns a "void *" type.
Cheers,
Miguel
