This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: volatile semantics

From: Dale Johannesen <dalej at apple dot com>
To: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>
Cc: "D. Hugh Redelmeier" <hugh at mimosa dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, Dale Johannesen <dalej at apple dot com>, Nathan Sidwell <nathan at codesourcery dot com>, Mike Stump <mrs at apple dot com>
Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2005 12:05:09 -0700
Subject: Re: volatile semantics
References: <851D2CB0-93DF-4C49-A6A8-8895DB1A08F9@apple.com> <42778D99.7070904@codesourcery.com> <b0f8ff9938df57bbfda0ec3aea4fc02b@apple.com> <Pine.LNX.4.61.0507161250120.1478@redshift.mimosa.com> <17113.17689.558864.411876@zapata.pink>

On Jul 16, 2005, at 10:34 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:

6.3.2.1: when an object is said to have a particular type, the type is specified by the lvalue used to designate the object.

I don't have a standard here, but I will point out that IF this sentence is interpreted to mean

 the type of an object
changes depending on how it is accessed.


this also makes nonsense of gcc's implementation of type-based aliasing
rules.

*((int *)&x) = 3

would then be valid whatever the type of x.

References:
- Re: volatile semantics
  - From: D. Hugh Redelmeier
- Re: volatile semantics
  - From: Andrew Haley

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]