From: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: 02 February 2022 20:14
> To: David Laight
>
> On Wed, Feb 2, 2022 at 5:19 PM David Laight <David.Laight@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > - The conditional operator (?:) requires that both expressions have the
> > the same type (after numeric promotions).
>
> I think you are referring to the arithmetic types case, but that one
> does not apply here.
The type of the result depends on the type of the 2nd and 3rd arguments.
Not on the value of the first one.
> > - If the expressions have distinct non-NULL pointer types then they are both
> > cast to (void *) and the result has type 'void *'.
>
> GCC and Clang give `void *` for this, but something like `float *` and
> `int *` do not fit the constrains of the operator.
Compiling:
#define k(x) (sizeof(*(1 ? (float *)8 : (int *)8)))
int f1(void){ return k(6); }
gives:
f1:
movl $1, %eax
ret
(see https://godbolt.org/z/e1MvYYxGz)
Change to #define k(x) (sizeof(*(1 ? (void *)(x) : (int *)0)))
and you only get 4 when x is a compile-time constant 0.
It has nothing to with the condition, the compiler is trying to 'sort out'
a suitable return type.
I suspect the mismatched pointer types might even be a gcc extension.
David
-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
