This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: finding strict aliasing problems
- To: Joe Buck <jbuck at racerx dot synopsys dot com>
- Subject: Re: finding strict aliasing problems
- From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 10:38:32 +0200
- Cc: Brad Lucier <lucier at math dot purdue dot edu>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, feeley at iro dot umontreal dot ca
- References: <200105010658.BAA31179@zakon.math.purdue.edu> <200105010743.AAA18017@racerx.synopsys.com>
- Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 12:43:18AM -0700, Joe Buck wrote:
> For those that took the rigorous language lawyer side in that debate,
> note that even an expert programmer like Brad has difficulty getting this
> stuff right. Clearly making no-strict-aliasing the default was a wise
> move for 2.95.2.
Right, on the other side IMHO making no-strict-aliasing be the default for
3.0 again would be a bad decision - people would be never forced to fix
broken sources so we'd stay with no-strict-aliasing forever.
>From my experience (gcc-2.96-RH defaults to strict-aliasing) the vast
majority of sources we've been compiling is ok, there were a couple of bugs
(like in X11) which have been fixed since then and ATM I'm aware of just 2
packages which have not been fixed yet (clapack and one more).
Jakub