From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15147 invoked by alias); 23 Nov 2004 15:07:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 14924 invoked from network); 23 Nov 2004 15:07:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mprelay.uc.edu) (129.137.3.48) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 23 Nov 2004 15:07:00 -0000 Received: from [172.30.6.107] (zhivago.erc-wireless.uc.edu [172.30.6.107]) by mprelay.uc.edu (MOS 3.4.7-GR) with ESMTP id CAO02098; Tue, 23 Nov 2004 10:06:51 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: References: <4D2CF60C-3919-11D9-8BD2-000A95BCF344@apple.com> <20041117212847.A26376@synopsys.com> <6F5FC748-7BBD-44B9-8DDC-246949F16102@apple.com> <20041118102741.A8347@synopsys.com> <77E8D36A-C0C2-4B03-964C-BEE0FE7BBBC3@apple.com> <98C86CD4-39E2-11D9-B2D5-000A95BCF344@apple.com> <20041119170011.A30410@synopsys.com> <9E6AD708-3A93-11D9-9070-000D9330C50E@apple.com> <20041119174042.A1311@synopsys.com> <90DC5074-3A96-11D9-9070-000D9330C50E@apple.com> <9CD04F70-3CC6-11D9-B847-000D9330C50E@apple.com> <41A253A2.1050205@codesourcery.com> <24BB97A2-3CD3-11D9-B847-000D9330C50E@apple.com> <41A30346.8050602@codesourcery.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v619) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <4D0584E2-3D61-11D9-AEB4-000A95D692F4@physics.uc.edu> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Steve Naroff , gcc mailing list , Matt Austern , Daniel Berlin , Ziemowit Laski , Nathan Sidwell , Joe Buck , Mike Stump From: Andrew Pinski Subject: Re: generalized lvalues -- patch outline Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 15:15:00 -0000 To: Michael Matz X-SW-Source: 2004-11/txt/msg00811.txt.bz2 On Nov 23, 2004, at 9:56 AM, Michael Matz wrote: > Hi,Practically speaking 4.0 is currently strictly less usefull in some > aspects for the average C programmer. The average C programmer would not have thought to use this extension unless they just decided one day to try it or they actually read the gcc documentation (which I know almost nobody does). (We keep getting bug reports about invalid C++ which explicitly added to the changes page and in the bug section of the documentation but those people seems not bothered to read those places.) if you had the following: ((int*)a)++; the better idea would be: char *a1 = (char*)a; a1 += sizeof(int)/sizeof(char); a = (typeof(a))(a1); -- Pinski