This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Strict aliasing affects glibc 2.1.1 as well as Linux
- To: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Subject: Re: Strict aliasing affects glibc 2.1.1 as well as Linux
- From: Benjamin Redelings I <bredelin at ucsd dot edu>
- Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 14:34:58 -0700 (PDT)
- Reply-To: bredelin at ucsd dot edu
> Why are people so hung up on __builtin_memcpy(), and why are people
> repeatedly completely ignoring my point about _extended behaviour_?
Good question! Are people really saying that it will not be possible to
get good performance unless you use assembly? And that this probably can
be solved by tabulating all useful assembly routines as builtins? Let's
hope not.
> These are problems that do not have canned answers, and where you want
> to give the programmer control.
hear, hear!
> USERS matter. And users want control. They don't want a compiler that
> tells them they cannot do things.
Rephrasing the part about "control" in terms of "expressiveness" : GOOD
compilers don't require __builtin_memcpy to be written in assembly.
If the alternative to having __norestrict is that lots and lots of
code is written in assembly, then I would hope that people would allow an
extra dimension of expressiveness be added to C.
But perhaps I'm missing something?
-BenRI