On Tue, 21 Jan 2020, Richard Biener wrote: > Fourth. That PNVI (I assume it's the whole pointer-provenance stuff) > wants to get the "best" of both which can never be done since a compiler > needs to have a way to be conservative - in this area it's conflicting > conservative treatment which is impossible.
This paragraph is unclear, I don't immediately see what the conflicting goals are. The rest is clear enough given the previous discussions I saw. Did you mean the restriction that you cannot do arithmetic involving two integers based on pointers, get a value corresponding to one of them, cast it back and get a pointer suitable for accessing either of two originally pointed-to objects? I don't see that as a conflict because it places a restriction on users, not the compiler. Alexander
