Re: C++ aliasing rules

[Dan Nicolaescu <dann at godzilla dot ICS dot UCI dot EDU>]

Now that 3.1 is out of the way we can reopen this discussion... 
For reference the start of this thread is at: 
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2002-04/msg00049.html


mike stump <mrs@windriver.com> writes:

  > > To: Dan Nicolaescu <dann@godzilla.ICS.UCI.EDU>
  > > Cc: mike stump <mrs@windriver.com>, gcc@gcc.gnu.org, libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
  > > From: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
  > > Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 18:44:05 +0100
  > 
  > > I don't see how Mike's statement answers my question.
  > 
  > Yes, I agree, I don't think it does.
  > 
  > > I would probably support writing that into the standard.  But I
  > > don't think that's what it says now.
  > 
  > A hard line would be we should be conservative, and get it written
  > into the standard first.  I think it would be reasonable for the
  > standard to say they don't alias.
  > 
  > If we want to lead the standard, I think we can.  Because the standard
  > isn't perfectly clear, it would be good to document what we did.

If we decide to lead the standard, I volunteer the write the patch and
the associated GCC documentation. 
Somebody else will have to take care about the standardization
process... 

Who can make a decision about this? 


        --dan