From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Toon Moene <toon@moene.indiv.nluug.nl>
To: dewar@gnat.com
Cc: egcs@tantalophile.demon.co.uk, aoliva@redhat.com, denisc@overta.ru, dkorn@pixelpower.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org, peter.osterlund@mailbox.swipnet.se
Subject: Re: Bug in loop optimize (invalid postinc to preinc transformation)
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 15:18:00 -0000
Message-id: <3A4E69F8.F09B56E8@moene.indiv.nluug.nl>
References: <20001230024259.36BD134D81@nile.gnat.com>
X-SW-Source: 2000-12/msg00875.html

dewar@gnat.com wrote:

> <<Quite.  There's a pointer constant in the offending code.  It's not in
> any array.  Do we offer implementation defined behaviour for numerical
> pointer constants or not?  They do come in useful occasionally.
> >>

> It is hard NOT to offer implementation defined behavior :-)

Robert has spent too many hours in Standardization Committees.

Sorry, couldn't resist :-)

-- 
Toon Moene - mailto:toon@moene.indiv.nluug.nl - phoneto: +31 346 214290
Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG  Maartensdijk, The Netherlands
Maintainer, GNU Fortran 77: http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/g77_news.html
Join GNU Fortran 95: http://g95.sourceforge.net/ (under construction)