On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 2:58 PM, Herman, Geza <g...@bitquad.com> wrote:
> On 06/07/2011 12:27 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 5:51 AM, Herman, Geza<g...@bitquad.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Sorry, if it has been discussed before, I found a lot of information on
>>> strict aliasing in gcc, but nothing about this particular case. I'd like
>>> to
>>> code a custom container class: it has a char[] (or dynamically allocated
>>> "char *") for storage, putting an element is done with placement new,
>>> getting an element is done with reinterpret_cast'ing the storage, like
>>> this:
>>>
>>> #include<new>
>>>
>>> struct Something {
>>> int value;
>>>
>>> Something() { value = 42; }
>>> };
>>>
>>> template<typename OBJECT, int MAX_SIZE>
>>> struct Container {
>>> union {
>>> char data[sizeof(OBJECT)*MAX_SIZE];
>>> // here goes a member which ensures proper alignment
>>> };
>>> int currentSize;
>>>
>>> Container() { currentSize=0; }
>>>
>>> void add() {
>>> new(data+sizeof(OBJECT)*currentSize) OBJECT;
>>> currentSize++;
>>> }
>>>
>>> OBJECT&operator[](int index) {
>>> // assert(index<currentSize);
>>> return reinterpret_cast<OBJECT*>(data)[index]; // gcc warns here
>>> }
>>> };
>>>
>>> void bar() {
>>> Container<Something, 5> c;
>>> c.add();
>>> c[0].value = 41;
>>> }
>>>
>>> Here, gcc warns on the reinterpret_cast line. However, as I understand,
>>> this usage cannot cause any harm. If I always access "data" as "OBJECT",
>>> nothing can go wrong, right? Even, if I access "data" as char sometimes,
>>> gcc should handle this case, I think. Of course, if "data" would be a
>>> non-char array, the situation would be different. Is the warning
>>> appropriate here? Can a cast from char[] cause anything bad? If it's
>>> difficult to detect this usage method on the compiler side, is there any
>>> way
>>> to avoid this warning just for this line (maybe rephrasing this line
>>> somehow
>>> to tell gcc that everything is OK)?
>>
>> The code looks ok and should work fine with GCC 4.5 and newer. No
>> guarantees for older versions though, if it works there it certainly isn't
>> by design.
>
> Thanks for the answer!
>
> You're right, this example compiles without warnings with GCC 4.5. My
> mistake, I copied a version which warns only with GCC 4.4 in my previous
> email. But, if I add another member function, like:
>
> OBJECT &first() {
> return reinterpret_cast<OBJECT*>(data)[0]; // gcc warns here
> }
>
> and call it from "bar()":
>
> c.first().value = 41;
>
> I tried both GCC 4.5, and the latest available in my system (gcc version
> 4.7.0 20110531 (experimental) [trunk revision 174470]), both produces a
> warning. Is it a false positive warning?
Yes.
Richard.
> Luckily, generated code works, even with previous versions of GCC.
>
>>
>> Richard.
>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Geza
>>>
>
>
