From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Martin v. Loewis" To: ak@muc.de Cc: mark@codesourcery.com, egcs@egcs.cygnus.com Subject: Re: Linux and aliasing? Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 15:38:00 -0000 Message-id: <199906032236.AAA00711@mira.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de> References: <19990603131344.W375@perlsupport.com> <19990603104038Z.mitchell@codesourcery.com> X-SW-Source: 1999-06/msg00103.html > Bad :/. -fno-strict-aliasing is the only alternative then. What a pity, > Linus' proposal looked reasonable. It isn't really that bad. Of course, you lose some optimization opportunities - but it isn't worse than earlier versions of gcc, which never considered the type for aliasing, anyway. Regards, Martin From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Martin v. Loewis" To: ak@muc.de Cc: mark@codesourcery.com, egcs@egcs.cygnus.com Subject: Re: Linux and aliasing? Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1999 15:43:00 -0000 Message-ID: <199906032236.AAA00711@mira.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de> References: <19990603131344.W375@perlsupport.com> <19990603104038Z.mitchell@codesourcery.com> X-SW-Source: 1999-06n/msg00103.html Message-ID: <19990630154300.wzT_bu5qcIUCh7_Bv-w-Y52cVS7GqsUPzKxv0GL8x5I@z> > Bad :/. -fno-strict-aliasing is the only alternative then. What a pity, > Linus' proposal looked reasonable. It isn't really that bad. Of course, you lose some optimization opportunities - but it isn't worse than earlier versions of gcc, which never considered the type for aliasing, anyway. Regards, Martin