This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: gcc 4.2 more strict check for "function called through a non-compatible type"
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> I realized that I am still not stating my position very clearly. I
> don't think we should make any extra effort to make this code work:
> after all, the code is undefined. I just think 1) we should not
> insert a trap; 2) we should not ICE.
I agree. If the inlining thing is indeed a problem (and I can see how
it could be, even though you could not immediately reproduce it), then
we should mark the call as uninlinable. Disabling an optimization in
the face of such a cast seems more user-friendly than inserting a trap.
Since we know the code is undefined, we're not pessimizing correct
code, so this is not a case where to support old code we'd be holding
back performance for valid code.
I also agree with Gaby that we should document this as an extension. If
we go to the work of putting it back in, we should ensure that it
continues to work for the foreseeable future. Part of that is writing
down what we've decided.
--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery
mark@codesourcery.com
(650) 331-3385 x713