Dir4.1 Undefined.

Moderators: misra-c, david ward

Post Reply
ogawa.kiyoshi
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 10:08 am
Company: NMIRI, Gifu-University, TOPPERS project
Location: Japan

Dir4.1 Undefined.

Post by ogawa.kiyoshi » Sat Nov 30, 2013 11:24 am

Dea all. I am a member of MISRA-C Study Group Japan.

There are two question/information.

1.
At Dir4.1 , Undefined C90 and C99 are listed.
I think C99 Undefined 15 is related C90 Undefined 90.
Are there any relation between Dir4.1 and C90 Undefined 90.

2.
The table of Appendix H.1, some differences from Dir4.1 Undefiend C90 and C99 list.
At Appendix H.1
C99 42 and 112 has "Dir4.1" , perhaps, C99 43 and 113.
C99 44, 45,48, 49, and C90 94 have no "Dir4.1".

Best Regards.
[email protected]
Dr. OGAWA Kioshi
@kaizen_nagoya

misra-c
Posts: 556
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 1:11 pm

Re: Dir4.1 Undefined.

Post by misra-c » Wed Dec 18, 2013 2:46 pm

Reply to question 1:
C99 Undefined 15 is closer to C90 Undefined 15 than C90 Undefined 90.
C90 Undefined 15 is already included in the list of undefined features.

There are many undefined rules that could be mapped to Dir 4.1 so we have only included the ones that we feel are the most important. C90 Undefined 90 maps better to rule 21.7.

Reply to question 2:
Appendix H lists those guidelines which are most applicable for avoiding the undefined issue. However if that guideline is deviated the undefined behaviour may then be caught by other guidelines.
For example adherence to rule 18.1 will prevent the occurrence of C99 Undefined 43. It is also listed in the main document under Dir 4.1 as Undefined 43 can produce run-time errors if rule 18.1 is not applied.

However, as stated in the response to Question 1, not all possible mappings are listed under Dir 4.1 as it was felt that it would produce too long a list to be useful.
---
Posted by and on behalf of
the MISRA C Working Group

Post Reply

Return to “7.4 Code design”