This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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: Volatile MEMs in statement expressions and functions inlined as trees


Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com> writes:

[...]

| That flies in the face of the C++ standard itself, which was quoted in
| this thread.

That part only says what the *result* of the assignment is.  But it is
*irrelevant* to say what the assignment operator expects the right
operand to be.  There lies our disagreement.


[...]

|  - made-up-rule #2: lvalue->rvalue conversion is a dereference
| 
| 	This "rule" is _also_ not supported by any standard I have ever

4.1/2
  The value contained in the object indicated by the lvalue is the
  rvalue result. When an lvalue-to-rvalue con-version occurs within
  the operand of sizeof (5.3.3) the value contained in the referenced
  object is not accessed, since that operator does not evaluate its
  operand. 

-- Gaby


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