From: Tim Hollebeek <tim@hollebeek.com>
To: davek-ml@ntlworld.com (Dave Korn)
Cc: tim@hollebeek.com (Tim Hollebeek),
geoffk@geoffk.org (Geoff Keating),
aoliva@redhat.com (Alexandre Oliva),
kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu, gcc@gcc.gnu.org (gcc),
dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Bug in loop optimize (invalid postinc to preinc transformation)
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 01:51:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200012291011.FAA30132@cj44686-b.reston1.va.home.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <028901c0715f$36a61620$1998fd3e@ubik>
Dave Korn writes ...
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tim Hollebeek" <tim@hollebeek.com>
> Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2000 11:42 PM
>
> > If pointers are implementation as unsigned offsets into a flat memory
s/implementation/implemented/
> > model, one of two things is true:
>
> Nope. Pointers are abstract types. The mere fact that the underlying
> implementation uses what are effectively 32 bit unsigned ints (which isn't
> even the case on segmented architectures) isn't relevant.
Read "If ..." as "Assuming ...". So "Nope" isn't really a possible
response. I intentionally restricted my post to an ISO C compiler on
a particular type of architecture and that implements pointers in a
particular way, in an attempt to point out that *even if* pointers are
(essentially) unsigned integers, the standard is written in such a way
that wrapping *still* isn't relevant.
Sorry if that wasn't clear.
(discussion of the abstract semantics deleted; you're preaching to the
choir here)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2000-12-29 1:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2000-12-28 5:40 Robert Dewar
2000-12-28 12:21 ` Alexandre Oliva
2000-12-28 14:32 ` Geoff Keating
2000-12-28 15:22 ` Tim Hollebeek
2000-12-28 22:20 ` Dave Korn
2000-12-29 0:52 ` Richard Henderson
2000-12-29 1:51 ` Tim Hollebeek [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2000-12-31 8:30 dewar
2001-01-03 0:52 ` Jamie Lokier
2000-12-29 18:43 dewar
2000-12-30 15:18 ` Toon Moene
2000-12-28 20:33 dewar
2000-12-28 1:14 Richard Kenner
2000-12-27 22:40 Robert Dewar
2000-12-29 18:36 ` Jamie Lokier
2000-12-27 3:04 Bug in loop optimize (TREE stage) David Korn
2000-12-27 15:42 ` Bug in loop optimize (invalid postinc to preinc transformation) Peter Osterlund
2000-12-27 19:55 ` Alexandre Oliva
2000-12-27 21:09 ` Torbjorn Granlund
2000-12-27 21:20 ` Alexandre Oliva
2000-12-27 22:24 ` Jamie Lokier
2000-12-31 8:25 ` Andreas Schwab
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=200012291011.FAA30132@cj44686-b.reston1.va.home.com \
--to=tim@hollebeek.com \
--cc=aoliva@redhat.com \
--cc=davek-ml@ntlworld.com \
--cc=dewar@gnat.com \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=geoffk@geoffk.org \
--cc=kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu \
/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).