public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "msebor at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/65892] gcc fails to implement N685 aliasing of union members
Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2015 15:59:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-65892-4-gLGonjEUE9@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-65892-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65892

--- Comment #17 from Martin Sebor <msebor at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The C Union Visibility rule was intended to cover that case.  The trouble is
that the rule tends to be interpreted differently by different people, users
and implementers alike: Is it the union object that must be visible at the
point of the access, or just the union type?  Must the access be performed
using the union object, or just the union type, or neither?  There are
implementations that apparently disable aliasing at the first sight of a union
in a translation unit.  There are others that only disable it for structs used
in a union.  And others still that don't do anything special unless the aliased
object is accessed through the union itself.

There are also aliasing problems beyond unions that affect both languages. 
WG14 N1520 referenced in comment #10 gives a few scary examples.  This still
needs to be resolved.  (I haven't talked to Clark since Lenexa so unless he's
made progress on the issue the new paper I mentioned in comment #10 will have
to wait until 2016.)


  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-09-09 15:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-04-25 23:59 [Bug c/65892] New: " msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-04-26  0:11 ` [Bug c/65892] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-04-26  0:15 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-04-26  0:17 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-04-26 17:50 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-04-26 18:00 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-04-27  9:00 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-04-27 14:57 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-04-28 17:08 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com
2015-05-13 16:02 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-05-21 11:41 ` mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-09-09  0:39 ` myriachan at gmail dot com
2015-09-09  0:43 ` myriachan at gmail dot com
2015-09-09 13:44 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com
2015-09-09 14:25 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-09-09 14:42 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-09-09 15:59 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2018-04-23 14:27 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=bug-65892-4-gLGonjEUE9@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).