This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Sorry to mention aliasing again, but is the standard IN6_ARE_ADDR_EQUAL really wrong?
- From: Dave Korn <dave dot korn dot cygwin at googlemail dot com>
- To: Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at adacore dot com>
- Cc: Dave Korn <dave dot korn dot cygwin at googlemail dot com>, Andreas Schwab <schwab at linux-m68k dot org>, Paul Koning <Paul_Koning at dell dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>
- Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 19:12:37 +0000
- Subject: Re: Sorry to mention aliasing again, but is the standard IN6_ARE_ADDR_EQUAL really wrong?
- References: <4B491A00.5090502@gmail.com> <m2r5pxg6xz.fsf@igel.home> <4B4A1E97.5060205@gmail.com> <201001101938.21599.ebotcazou@adacore.com>
Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> Yes, fair enough; but properties can commute just as much as operators
>> can (although it's perhaps less intuitively surprising when they don't).
>
> To be picky, binary operators are commutative (or not), binary relations are
> symmetric (or not).
Ah, I wasn't aware of the subtleties of the terminology, thanks for pointing
it out.
cheers,
DaveK