Subject: bug#40671: [DOC] modify literal objects

From: Dmitry Gutov <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2020 21:53:05 +0300

On 26.04.2020 21:41, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked],
>>   [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
>> From: Dmitry Gutov <[email-masked]>
>> Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2020 21:32:45 +0300
>>
>> My point is, that program is using the same instrument as this one,
>> which *will* blow up at runtime.
> 
> No, it isn't the same instrument.  Your program constructs a function
> call using address that has no valid instructions.  Paul's program
> does nothing like that, it just attempts to write to a data address
> which may or may not be in write-protected storage.  So your program
> will always blow up, whereas the other one will only blow up if the
> memory is write-protected.

I was imprecise. The program is doing a different thing.

But the programmer is using the same instrument in both cases to make it 
compile.