On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 10:19:06AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 09:50:56AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > I wonder if
> >
> > int foo (uintrptr_t x) { *(int *)x = 1; return 1; }
> >
> > is considered "noptr" by the standard but then by making a pointer out of
> > 'x' in
On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 09:50:56AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> I wonder if
>
> int foo (uintrptr_t x) { *(int *)x = 1; return 1; }
>
> is considered "noptr" by the standard but then by making a pointer out of
> 'x' invokes UB?
I don't know. The paper claims same behavior as const for functio
On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 7:05 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> C23 added in N2956 ( https://open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG14/www/docs/n2956.htm )
> two new attributes, which are described as similar to GCC const and pure
> attributes, but they aren't really same and it seems that even the paper
> is
Hi!
C23 added in N2956 ( https://open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG14/www/docs/n2956.htm )
two new attributes, which are described as similar to GCC const and pure
attributes, but they aren't really same and it seems that even the paper
is missing some of the differences.
The paper says unsequenced is the
