From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-104020-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 25712 invoked by alias); 13 Oct 2004 15:24:10 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 25701 invoked from network); 13 Oct 2004 15:24:08 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO NUTMEG.CAM.ARTIMI.COM) (217.40.111.177)
  by sourceware.org with SMTP; 13 Oct 2004 15:24:08 -0000
Received: from mace ([192.168.1.25]) by NUTMEG.CAM.ARTIMI.COM with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.0);
	 Wed, 13 Oct 2004 16:23:37 +0100
From: "Dave Korn" <dk@artimi.com>
To: "'Joseph S. Myers'" <jsm@polyomino.org.uk>
Cc: "'Andreas Schwab'" <schwab@suse.de>,
	"'Gabriel Dos Reis'" <gdr@cs.tamu.edu>,
	"'Phil Edwards'" <phil@codesourcery.com>,
	"'Zack Weinberg'" <zack@codesourcery.com>,
	"'Geoffrey Keating'" <geoffk@apple.com>,
	"'Ranjit Mathew'" <rmathew@gmail.com>,
	<gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: RE: Compiling GCC With a C++ Compiler (g++)
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 17:01:00 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0410131353340.23499@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
Message-ID: <NUTMEGUUx6EfkU9X3me0000045a@NUTMEG.CAM.ARTIMI.COM>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Oct 2004 15:23:38.0282 (UTC) FILETIME=[9CF540A0:01C4B138]
X-SW-Source: 2004-10/txt/msg00518.txt.bz2

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joseph S. Myers  
> Sent: 13 October 2004 15:10

> Without "restrict" the only relevant undefined behavior is if 
> the object 
> is *defined* with qualified type (6.7.3#5).  This can apply 
> with static or 
> automatic storage duration declarations such as
> 
>   struct { const char x } y = { z };
> 
> but cannot apply to an object of allocated storage duration.

  Huh?  Are you saying that in:

typedef struct { const char x } AA;

AA *py1, py2;
AA y1 = { z };

  py1 = malloc (sizeof *py2);
  py2 = &y1;

it is valid to say

  *(char *)(&py1->x) = '?';

but not valid to say

  *(char *)(&py2->x) = '?';

?  I think I may have reached the point at which I am starting to
boggle.....


    cheers, 
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....