From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 921 invoked by alias); 21 May 2005 22:28:58 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 912 invoked by uid 48); 21 May 2005 22:28:55 -0000 Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 22:28:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20050521222855.911.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "schlie at comcast dot net" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20050505153523.21402.gcc@arbruijn.dds.nl> References: <20050505153523.21402.gcc@arbruijn.dds.nl> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/21402] wrong-code with inlining and type-punned pointer X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2005-05/txt/msg03020.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From schlie at comcast dot net 2005-05-21 22:28 ------- (In reply to comment #6) > Subject: Re: wrong-code with inlining and type-punned pointer > > Sorry, I don't see that implication. However, GCC already has a > switch for tuning off such comparison. - Then what is the purpose of the this portion of the standard, if not to clarify the intent that lvalues which only differ in signness or otherwise compatible qualifications may validly alias each other? (this is an honest question, I'm not trying to be difficult) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21402