From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mike Stump To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, jbuck@synopsys.COM Cc: rms@gnu.org Subject: Re: type based aliasing again Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 18:02:00 -0000 Message-ID: <199909090211.TAA03202@kankakee.wrs.com> X-SW-Source: 1999-09n/msg00318.html Message-ID: <19990930180200.POClf6nrtzs-BO6WiI-0KIhB2EwIMB_l8FpXNjpHZ-U@z> My comment is similar to Mark's comment. Documentation, what can we document as working? Can users rely upon it working? Is it less confusing to a user to have the compiler predictably generate wrong code, or for it to almost always generate right code, even for bad code, except in really obscure and hard to understand cases? Anway, more questions from me than answers... Off hand though, if we can make the compiler generate `right' code in more cases, even if the users code is wrong, I think we should probably do it. I say this not with a language designer's hat on, but as someone that has to support users with possibly broken code. Kind of a quick fix to get them to leave me alone.