From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7718 invoked by alias); 20 Feb 2003 08:06:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 7702 invoked by uid 71); 20 Feb 2003 08:06:01 -0000 Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 08:06:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030220080601.7701.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: "Jan Beulich" Subject: Re: middle-end/9725: Invalid dependency determination Reply-To: "Jan Beulich" X-SW-Source: 2003-02/txt/msg00973.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR middle-end/9725; it has been noted by GNATS. From: "Jan Beulich" To: Cc: ,, Subject: Re: middle-end/9725: Invalid dependency determination Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 09:01:39 +0100 Which is almost as bad as the memcpy approach - the thing to be created that way (i.e. through a macro) can't possibly be an lvalue when supposed to access more than something contained within a single byte... I realized a supposedly legal (and working) approach anyway (though I continue to believe that the original bitfield approach is legal, too - just that it doesn't work with gcc...): Instead of having a union of aliased type and aliasing structure, add a flexible array of the aliased type to the end of the aliasing structure. >>> Wolfgang Bangerth 19.02.03 18:14:43 >>> > of not using this logic - how do I access sub-fields of a built-in type Go through a char* which can alias everything. This special case exists for this particular purpose: accessing single bytes in other types. W. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wolfgang Bangerth email: bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu www: http://www.ticam.utexas.edu/~bangerth/