MISRA Discussion Forums
Conversions outside of the essential type categories - Printable Version

+- MISRA Discussion Forums (https://forum.misra.org.uk)
+-- Forum: MISRA C (https://forum.misra.org.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: MISRA C:2012 and MISRA C:2023 guidelines (https://forum.misra.org.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=21)
+---- Forum: 8.10 The essential type model (https://forum.misra.org.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=165)
+---- Thread: Conversions outside of the essential type categories (/showthread.php?tid=1436)

Conversions outside of the essential type categories - gdavis - 10-07-2018

Hello,

With respect to the essential type rules, do conversions to types that are outside the essential type categories count as violations of the rules? For example:
Code:
#include
char buf[80];
char *p = buf;
uintptr_t p_plus_one;
void foo(void);
void foo(void) {
    // This next statement violates R11.4.  But does
    // it violate R10.8?  As a pointer type, p+1 does not
    // have a clear essential type category.
    p_plus_one = (uintptr_t)(p+1);
}
On the one hand, the spirit of the rule seems like it should prohibit such things. On the other hand, TC1 amends rule 10.1 to describe how a pointer type may not be used as an operand of a logical operator.

Thank you for your time.

-Greg

Re: Conversions outside of the essential type categories - misra-c - 18-10-2018

Rules 10.2-10.8 only apply to expressions whose operands have arithmetic types. This will be clarified in a future release.
Therefore rule 10.8 does not apply to "(uintptr_t)(p+1)".

However p+1 violates rule 18.4 and (uintptr_t)(p+1) violates rule 11.4