Richard Guenther wrote:
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 12:03 AM, Raoul Gough wrote:
Richard Guenther wrote:
[snip]
This is also invalid. You have to use placement new to change the dynamic
type of memory.
Yes, I guess that makes sense. I've modified the example like
Richard Guenther wrote:
On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 7:59 PM, Raoul Gough wrote:
[snip]
I guess the situation is more complicated in C++, which has explicit
destructors. Consider the following example, which is getting closer to the
problem that originally got me interested in this subject
Richard Guenther wrote:
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 12:55 PM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 12:19 PM, Raoul Gough wrote:
[snip]
Here we pass into bar a pointer to int and double at the same storage
location. So now, if the compiler goes ahead and reorders the read and
ent type. However, this re-use
takes place within function bar, which doesn't necessarily know about
the union (especially if it's in a different compilation unit).
So, my question is, does the salias analysis indicate that the compiler
thinks it can reorder the operations in function
