From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-415858-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 11655 invoked by alias); 20 Feb 2013 05:54:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 11244 invoked by uid 48); 20 Feb 2013 05:53:56 -0000
From: "demiurg_spb at freemail dot ru" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/56263] [avr] Provide strict address-space checking
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 05:54:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: demiurg_spb at freemail dot ru
X-Bugzilla-Status: SUSPENDED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P5
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.8.0
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-56263-4-NIp0ggGFlw@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-56263-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-56263-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2013-02/txt/msg02023.txt.bz2


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56263

--- Comment #5 from demiurg_spb at freemail dot ru 2013-02-20 05:53:53 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #3)
> > (In reply to comment #2)
> > 
> 
> It's a shortcoming in the Embedded C paper and I agree with you that more
> elaborate Embedded C paper would be more convenient here.
> 
> There are two ways out of this:
> 
> 1) Extend the Embedded C paper and propose an addendum to the ISO WG14.
> 
> 2) Implement this extension no matter whether Embedded C comes with this
> extension.  Find someone who implements this extension, supports it and makes
> sure there are no conflicts with the vanilla Embedded C.
> 
> Notice that with the extension, in the following example "init" would be
> located in flash but "assign" would still be located in RAM.
> 
> void f_init (void)
> {
>     const __flash char *str = "init";
> }
> 
> void f_assign (void)
> {
>     const __flash char *str;
>     str = "assign";
> }

In my view, in this situation, the data must be placed in a flash ...
Standard really needs serious improvement.
It's logical, when the right-hand and left-hand side of each other have the
appropriate type. Moreover, for the implementation of this simple idea is not
objective difficulties.