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: Type-punning

From: "Andrew Pinski" <pinskia at gmail dot com>
To: "Silvius Rus" <rus at google dot com>
Cc: "Herman Geza" <hg211 at hszk dot bme dot hu>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 15:44:30 -0700
Subject: Re: Type-punning
References: <Pine.GSO.4.62.0706200019200.18202@ural2> <f5g20i$9rg$1@sea.gmane.org> <467C0AEF.9030208@google.com> <Pine.GSO.4.62.0706262142590.17177@ural2> <de8d50360706261259u7b86050bld14554afd3a329eb@mail.gmail.com> <Pine.GSO.4.62.0706262214520.2633@ural2> <468181D1.9080905@google.com> <Pine.GSO.4.62.0706262324100.2633@ural2> <468194AB.6020107@google.com>

On 6/26/07, Silvius Rus <rus@google.com> wrote:

I also think this case should not be flagged.  I have seen similar usage
in network programming.  Did it actually result in bad code or was it
just the warning that bothered you?


This case is valid only if you go back to original type of Vector.
Sorry but the C++ standard says even if two structs have the same
layout, the types are different even for aliasing.

Thanks,
Andrew Pinski

References:
- Type-punning
  - From: Herman Geza
- Re: Type-punning
  - From: Sergei Organov
- Re: Type-punning
  - From: Silvius Rus
- Re: Type-punning
  - From: Herman Geza
- Re: Type-punning
  - From: Andrew Pinski
- Re: Type-punning
  - From: Herman Geza
- Re: Type-punning
  - From: Silvius Rus
- Re: Type-punning
  - From: Herman Geza
- Re: Type-punning
  - From: Silvius Rus

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