This is the mail archive of the gcc-bugs@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: gcc 4.0.0 on amd64: problem with -O2?

From: Harald Dunkel <harald dot dunkel at t-online dot de>
To: Andrew Pinski <pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu>
Cc: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org, aj at andaco dot de
Date: Sun, 08 May 2005 08:21:30 +0200
Subject: Re: gcc 4.0.0 on amd64: problem with -O2?
References: <427D0339.7030904@t-online.de> <680cf3ff627ea4ce82861a8253bb08b7@physics.uc.edu> <427D1619.3070705@t-online.de> <5ad10eb39c7f76b4dfb86e5217aab711@physics.uc.edu>

Andrew Pinski wrote:
>
> Wrong, try again.  Violating aliasing rules cause undefined behavior
> so seg faulting is an okay thing to do.

But producing a warning message and bad code is not OK. Either
using a "type-punned pointer" should be treated as a fatal
error, because gcc would create bad code, or gcc should create
working code.

If gcc knows that the code is bad, why does it continue?

Regards

Harri

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Follow-Ups:
- Re: gcc 4.0.0 on amd64: problem with -O2?
  - From: Andrew Pinski
- Re: gcc 4.0.0 on amd64: problem with -O2?
  - From: Falk Hueffner

References:
- gcc 4.0.0 on amd64: problem with -O2?
  - From: Harald Dunkel
- Re: gcc 4.0.0 on amd64: problem with -O2?
  - From: Andrew Pinski
- Re: gcc 4.0.0 on amd64: problem with -O2?
  - From: Harald Dunkel
- Re: gcc 4.0.0 on amd64: problem with -O2?
  - From: Andrew Pinski

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