Re: memory management

[Thomas Maier-Komor <maierkom@lpr.no-spam.e-technik.tu-muenchen.de>]

Robert A Duff wrote:
> The same is true of pointers in C and C++ -- an implementation is free
> to implement pointers as something other than a machine address.  In
> fact, if a C compiler wishes to check array bounds, it pretty much *has*
> to use fat pointers.  I know of one C compiler that did just that.  My
> point is that "pointer" is not synonymous with "single machine address",
> even in C.
> 

That's definetly an interesting implementation variant for the C
language. Could you tell us, which compiler did this? Has this been
documented anywhere?

TIA,

Tom