Fake anonymous functions in C

Question

In this SO thread, Brian Postow suggested a solution involving fake anonymous functions:

make a comp(L) function that returns the version of comp for arra

Answer 1

It is not possible to generate ordinary functions during run-time in either C or C++. What Brian suggested is based on a big "if": "...if you can fake anonymous functions...". And the answer to that "if" is: no, you can't. (Although it is not clear what he meant by "fake".)

(In C++ it is possible to generate function-like objects at run time, but not ordinary functions.)

The above applies to standard C and C++ languages. Particular implementations can support various implementation-provided extensions and/or manually-implemented hacks, like "closures", "delegates" and similar stuff. Nothing of that, of course, have anything to do with standard C/C++ languages.

Answer 2

See the answer I just posted to that question. You can use the callback(3) library to generate new functions at runtime. It's not standards compliant, since it involves lots of ugly platform-specific hacks, but it does work on a large number of systems.

The library takes care of allocating memory, making sure that memory is executable, and flushing the instruction cache if necessary, in order to ensure that code which is dynamically generated (i.e. the closure) is executable. It essentially generates stubs of code that might look like this on x86:

  pop %ecx
  push $THUNK
  push %ecx
  jmp $function
THUNK:
  .long $parameter

And then returns the address of the first instruction. What this stub does is stores the the return address into ECX (a scratch register in the x86 calling convention), pushes an extra parameter onto the stack (a pointer to a thunk), and then re-pushes the return address. Then, it jumps to the actual function. This results in the function getting fooled into thinking it has an extra parameter, which is the hidden context of the closure.

It's actually more complicated than that (the actual function called at the end of the stub is __vacall_r, not the function itself, and __vacall_r() handles more implementation details), but that's the basic principle.

Answer 3

I don't believe you can do that with C99 -- there's no partial application or closure facility available unless you start manually generating machine code at runtime.

Apple's recently proposed blocks would work, though you need compiler support for that. Here's a brief overview of blocks. I have no idea when/if any vendor outside apple will support them.