http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49733
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-07-13 14:06:17 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) > C test case matching the Fortran one, which also shows that the "if" is not > optimized away. According to Ian (cf. thread linked to in comment 0), C99's restrict does not guarantee that the value remains the same after a function call. Assuming that's the case, then C does not seem to have an equivalent qualifier to Fortran's nontarget/nonasynchronous/nonpointer* variables. - And, hence, some tree flag is missing to for such nonpointer* Fortran variables. (* pointer in the Fortran sense.) I failed to see this from C99's "6.7.3.1 Formal definition of restrict", which is written in a rather convoluted way.
