Hi andrew



 ac> Hi there.  Why does emx/gcc disallow the modification of string constants?

 ac> Or more to the point - why does ANSI/ISO C disallow this?  Tnx.



 ac> Note that the following code when compiled with emx/gcc will cause an

 ac> exception error when executed, due to this ANSI/ISO C rule.



Hmm.. if the standard says so, shouldn't the compiler have been

able to detect the problem by implicitly declaring str as constant

or something equivalent?



 ac> When compiled

 ac> with Borland C++ for DOS 3.1, Microsoft QuickC 2.5 or Borland C++ for OS/2

 ac> 1.0, the following code executes without error.  CLint 1.41 also passed the

 ac> following code with flying colors.





 ac> #include 



 ac> int main(void)

 ac> {

 ac>     char *str = "Hello world";

 ac>     *(str + 5) = '\0';

 ac>     printf("str: `%s'\n", str);

 ac>     return 0;

 ac> }





Very interesting. Emphasises the difference between program space

and data space, I spose, cos the "Hello world" in the above code

lives in the program, not the data. But shouldn't the same rule

apply to



 int i = 1;



?



Cheers



--- PPoint 1.88