------- Additional Comments From pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu 2005-05-05 18:41 ------- Subject: Re: wrong-code with inlining and type-punned pointer
On May 5, 2005, at 1:19 PM, schlie at comcast dot net wrote: > > ------- Additional Comments From schlie at comcast dot net 2005-05-05 > 17:19 ------- > (In reply to comment #2) >> "unsigned char *" and "char *" are in two different aliasing sets >> while char >> and unsigned char are in the same one, well char is every aliasing >> set. > > Then I can't help but wonder if it may make sense to reconsider placing > char *, and (un)signed char * in different aliasing sets, as there > seems > little if any justifiable reason to generate incorrect code for > references to > types which are considered be compatible for assignment. (Just as > arguably > it likely makes little sense to generate warnings for the comparison > between > pointers to types which differ only in signness for the same reason). > As > neither seem particularly useful, and the former is clearly needlessly > potentially dangerious. Because this is what the standard says is allowed. The standard also says the comparisons and assignment between pointers without a case is invalid code and should be diagnostic. Again this is what the standard says for these things and GCC follows the C standard. -- Pinski -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21402
