[Pure C] Clang is better than GCC

Sorry for the provocative title, but I'm too emotional these days.

This code:

#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>

struct tmp
  int x, y, z;

int main()
  struct tmp* m_result_original=NULL;
  struct tmp* m_result_my_version=NULL;

  // m_result_original=do_something_version_1();
  // m_result_my_version=do_something_version_2();

  if (memcmp(m_result_original, m_result_my_version, sizeof(struct tmp)!=0))
      printf ("Error - test failed!\n");

There is an unnoticed typo. in memcmp(). I wrote here:

  if (memcmp(m_result_original, m_result_my_version, sizeof(struct tmp)!=0))

But must be (note closing brackets at the end):

  if (memcmp(m_result_original, m_result_my_version, sizeof(struct tmp))!=0)

Yes, this is a problem of weak static typing of pure C. Pure C is a great tool for some jobs, but here be dragons, as they say.

The problem is that (sizeof(struct ...)!=0)==1, so size=1 always for memcmp(). Instead of comparing two tmp, my code compared only 1 byte of each structs.

And GCC 9.4 was silent, even with -Wall, and so is G++. And MSVC 2017 is silent as well, with /Owall. But Clang 10 warns even without -Wall:

2.c:17:72: warning: size argument in 'memcmp' call is a comparison [-Wmemsize-comparison]
  if (memcmp(m_result_original, m_result_my_version, sizeof(struct tmp)!=0))
2.c:17:7: note: did you mean to compare the result of 'memcmp' instead?
  if (memcmp(m_result_original, m_result_my_version, sizeof(struct tmp)!=0))
      ^                                                                   ~
2.c:17:54: note: explicitly cast the argument to size_t to silence this warning
  if (memcmp(m_result_original, m_result_my_version, sizeof(struct tmp)!=0))
                                                     (size_t)(            )
1 warning generated.

Yes, venerable GCC is a very important and respected tool. And this is my bug, not GCC's flaw.

But that bug in my code ruined one month of my work. I coded without realizing tests don't work at all. OUCH!

I probably should have tried Clang at start. Or try several compilers in parallel, maybe? Or maybe I should stop using pure C...

Comments at lobste.rs, comments at HN, more comments at HN.

(the post first published at 20221126.)

List of my other blog posts.

Subscribe to my news feed

Yes, I know about these lousy Disqus ads. Please use adblocker. I would consider to subscribe to 'pro' version of Disqus if the signal/noise ratio in comments would be good enough.