So how can i do that Even i use fseek it only append from start

https://en.cppreference.com/w/c/io/fopen Is it so hard to read docs?

But not found

I think you didn't understand my question

I did

Read the docs

Ok

Hey Danya, long time wasn't here, Can I ask an irrelevant question? (2 actually because of that one LOL) Is it ok to ask where can I find a professional computer's language coders that wants to create stuff and if it will succeed they will be paid for it? TY and sorry on advance if it's not a cool question

I don't know, either. But, just curious, what exactly you mean by "stuff"?

How to scanf a register?

How to scanf a register?

Assembly registers are not readily accessible without using asm

Assembly registers are not readily accessible without using asm

I mean register keyword

I mean register keyword

You can't, scanf needs memory access. Register is not a memory location.

I mean register keyword

Register suggests to use a register but doesn't force it. The compiler can refuse to use the register. A register int cannot be used with pointers though. So you can't address it in the standard way

Simply because you can't take address of register. register int a; You can't use &a.

Simply because you can't take address of register. register int a; You can't use &a.

Though the compiler may put the a on memory, because register here is only a hint, unless you explicitly specify which register you are going to use. Semantically you can't take address of variable that is declared as register.

If you specify it like this register int a asm("eax"); Then a will always be eax, compiler is not allowed to assume the variable as another register nor memory anymore.

If you specify it like this register int a asm("eax"); Then a will always be eax, compiler is not allowed to assume the variable as another register nor memory anymore.

nice. thanks

Register suggests to use a register but doesn't force it. The compiler can refuse to use the register. A register int cannot be used with pointers though. So you can't address it in the standard way

This is the way to force the compiler to use register, you can even specify which register. https://godbolt.org/z/c8Kf9fb5K

I don't know, either. But, just curious, what exactly you mean by "stuff"?

I have alot of ideas that can be sell and be a good product in the industry

This is the way to force the compiler to use register, you can even specify which register. https://godbolt.org/z/c8Kf9fb5K

This is an extension of GCC if I recall correctly. By the way: the compiler will do this for you. Not considering special cases, the compiler knows better when to use a register. If you want to force the register, follow the message I'm replying to

This is an extension of GCC if I recall correctly. By the way: the compiler will do this for you. Not considering special cases, the compiler knows better when to use a register. If you want to force the register, follow the message I'm replying to

+1

Not at all. While programming Linux kernel modules, you may want to trace your program in runtime (via eBPF, for example) some registers (especially which are used to pass the arguments to the functions).

Not at all. While programming Linux kernel modules, you may want to trace your program in runtime (via eBPF, for example) some registers (especially which are used to pass the arguments to the functions).

Debugging is not programming

Using the register keyword or not, will not alter the core of debugging in kernel development

It is not debugging

https://ebpf.io/

Not at all. While programming Linux kernel modules, you may want to trace your program in runtime (via eBPF, for example) some registers (especially which are used to pass the arguments to the functions).

> Not considering special cases Or 50% of C and C++ programmers program Linux kernel modules?

C++ programmers cant program Linux modules

Only C

You are not required to do this. Tracing a program is a different world compared to using the register keyword or not

@Danya If not considering special cases, ok, I agree

Even if you need to trace a specific register, the register keyword is not related to the problem at hand

Ok, dude. You just dont know what are you talking about

C++ programmers cant program Linux modules

what nonsense is this?

Linux kernel modules are running in kernel space

Linux kernel modules are running in kernel space

sure, so?

Ok, dude. You just dont know what are you talking about

How is the register keyword use in not specific programming related to kernel development?

sure, so?

how does this relate to my knowledge in other languages?

I wasnt correct. C++ programmers can write these modules, but not in C++

That was the idea

I wasnt correct. C++ programmers can write these modules, but not in C++

🤯

@rellc There are no non-specific applications, you are right

it's not that you can't, it just will be much harder then it should be, and makes 0 sense to even try

It's technically possible to use C++ for a module. But it will be a nightmare and you will need to perfectly replicate the C ABI

It's technically possible to use C++ for a module. But it will be a nightmare and you will need to perfectly replicate the C ABI

exactly

Of course, you can write your own C++ compiler for linux kernel, or you can try to use LLVM (how it is with Rust)

but for what?

How is the register keyword use in not specific programming related to kernel development?

The register keyword is ignored by the most compilers. The idea was that the variable is used very much (for example in a loop), so it should reside inside a register. But the compilers know register allocation better, so most of them ignore it. But if you declare a variable with the register keyword, you can no longer get an address to it because you cannot have an address to a register. register int x; int* y = &x; // won't work

Of course, you can write your own C++ compiler for linux kernel, or you can try to use LLVM (how it is with Rust)

Do you know that LLVM has a C++ compiler?..

Do you know that LLVM has a C++ compiler?..

Yeah and LLVM IS written in C++

but for what?

I don't know, you just said it's impossible as a fact. lol

You are cling to words, guy

Yeah and LLVM IS written in C++

So is gcc, unfortunately :P

So is gcc, unfortunately :P

gcc is written in C

Though they have plans to rewrite in C++

You are cling to words, guy

Though they have plans to rewrite in C++

Yeah I think some parts already use some C++. And that's fine. C++ is a great language if you know how to use it

gcc is written in C

Lmao? No, look at it yourself

Lmao? No, look at it yourself

https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/tree/master/gcc/c

I think Janko told about g++

I think Janko told about g++

It's mainly written in C

https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/tree/master/gcc/cp

Oh, really. I didn/t know about the fact

https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/tree/master/gcc/cp

According to filenames only c++20 features are coded in C++

https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/tree/master/gcc/cp

I distrust that, I'm cloning the original repo right now. Will share results of wc -l from find

I distrust that, I'm cloning the original repo right now. Will share results of wc -l from find

Lol

It's a daily mirror

The team behind GCC told officially that C++ is an admissible language as long as it is used in a sensible way. In the present though, C++ has not been used widely by those programmers

Outside libstdc++ you will hardly find C++

janko@laptop gcc $ find . -iname *.c | wc -l 63229 janko@laptop gcc $ find . -iname *.cpp | wc -l 245 Drat. Well, it's built as a C++ program by default since 2012 or so. It's nominally a C++ program.

janko@laptop gcc $ find . -iname *.c | wc -l 63229 janko@laptop gcc $ find . -iname *.cpp | wc -l 245 Drat. Well, it's built as a C++ program by default since 2012 or so. It's nominally a C++ program.

How many of them is test suite to g++?😂

Or a part of libstdc++

Irrelevant, I'd say? C++ features are used for the C compiler. Would you call Linux an assembly program since it contains a lot of assembly code? The same logic may apply here, C is auxiliary

janko@laptop gcc $ find . -iname *.c | wc -l 63229 janko@laptop gcc $ find . -iname *.cpp | wc -l 245 Drat. Well, it's built as a C++ program by default since 2012 or so. It's nominally a C++ program.

How can you say that it's a C++ program nominally?

How can you say that it's a C++ program nominally?

Because it's compiled as a C++ program

If a C program has a minimal part in C++ it's not a C++ program

Irrelevant, I'd say? C++ features are used for the C compiler. Would you call Linux an assembly program since it contains a lot of assembly code? The same logic may apply here, C is auxiliary

Dude, there's no C++ code in GNU C Compiler

That's why I stressed nominally

Because it's compiled as a C++ program

What do you mean? The build process is not done with a C++ compiler

https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/tree/master/gcc/c

I did show it

Dude, there's no C++ code in GNU C Compiler

There is