On 18/02/16 05:19 +0100, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Hi, it seems I have updated the patch for comments received but did not send updated version to the ML. Here it is.Honza Index: changes.html =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-6/changes.html,v retrieving revision 1.58 diff -c -3 -p -r1.58 changes.html *** changes.html 15 Feb 2016 11:32:56 -0000 1.58 --- changes.html 18 Feb 2016 04:16:50 -0000 *************** For more information, see the *** 50,55 **** --- 50,124 ---- of array bounds. In particular, it enables <code>-fsanitize=bounds</code> as well as instrumentation of flexible array member-like arrays.</li> + <li>Type-based alias analysis now disambiguates accesses to different + pointers. This improves precision of the alias oracle by about 20-30% + on higher-level C++ programs. Programs doing invalid type punning + of pointer types may now need <code>-fno-strict-aliasing</code> + to work correctly.</li> + <li>Alias analysis now correctly supports <code>weakref</code> and + <code>alias</code> attributes. This makes it possible to access + both a variable and its alias in one translation unit which is common + with link-time optimization.</li> + <li>Value range propagation now assumes that <code>this</code> pointer
s/assumes that/assumes that the/
+ of C++ member functions is non-<code>NULL</code>. This eliminates + common <code>NULL</code> pointer checks
I would just use "null" not "NULL". "NULL" is just a macro, but "null pointer" and "non-null" are the formal terms used in the C++ standard so I'd use them not NULL. Otherwise it looks good to me.
