On 01/05/2010 01:15 AM, Erik Trulsson wrote: > On Mon, Jan 04, 2010 at 08:17:00PM +0000, Joshua Haberman wrote: >> Andrew Haley <aph <at> redhat.com> writes: >>> On 01/03/2010 10:14 PM, Joshua Haberman wrote: >>>> Andrew Haley <aph <at> redhat.com> writes: >>> "6.3.2.3 >>> >>> "A pointer to an object or incomplete type may be converted to a >>> pointer to a different object or incomplete type. If the resulting >>> pointer is not correctly aligned for the pointed-to type, the >>> behavior is undefined. Otherwise, when converted back again, the >>> result shall compare equal to the original pointer." >>> >>> This is *all* you are allowed to do with the converted pointer. You >>> may not dereference it. >> >> The text you quoted does not contain any "shall not" language about >> dereferencing, so this conclusion does not follow. > > It doesn't have to use any "shall not" language. If the standard does not > say that any particular action is allowed or otherwise defines what it > does, then that action implicitly has undefined behaviour.
Exactly. I think the OP is just being stubborn now. Andrew.
