Robert Dewar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Richard Guenther wrote: | | >The problem in this PR is that code like in the testcase (from OpenOffice) | >assumes that pointer overflow is defined. As the standard does not talk | >about wrapping pointer semantics at all (at least I couldn't find anything | >about that), how should we treat this? | > | How could pointer arithmetic overflow, the result must be within the | same allocated object (or just past it in the array case, and if necessary
It highly depends on what you define to be pointer arithmetic. Given the conversions pointer -> integer type integer type -> pointer T* -> U* I think your sentence is way to restrictive and does not capture C models. Richard, to resolve this issue, we need to be more precise about our mappings for pointer -> integer type integer type -> pointer T* -> U* conversions. This is not an issue to resolved in isolation, piece meal. -- Gaby
