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: Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at adacore dot com>
- To: Laurent GUERBY <laurent at guerby dot net>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, Robert Dewar <dewar at adacore dot com>, Paul Koning <Paul_Koning at dell dot com>, Andreas Schwab <schwab at linux-m68k dot org>, Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>, Dave Korn <dave dot korn dot cygwin at googlemail dot com>
- Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 00:34:13 +0100
- Subject: Re: Sorry to mention aliasing again, but is the standard IN6_ARE_ADDR_EQUAL really wrong?
- References: <4B491A00.5090502@gmail.com> <201001101546.50727.ebotcazou@adacore.com> <1263408943.11978.546.camel@pc2.unassigned-domain>
> BTW in Ada if one uses address clause to overlay a 16 character string
> and a 4 4-byte integer array (both aliased) which is then accessed what
> can we expect GCC-wise? Are we safe from aliasing related optimizations?
Yes, we use a big hammer to make sure 'Address is immune to these issues.
--
Eric Botcazou