rjmccall added a comment. Okay, thank you, I understand what you're saying now and you're completely right. It makes sense for this to be tied to the value stored into the l-value, as that actions is basically what's establishing a stronger rule about that pointer.
Side question: is the use of an overloaded intrinsic here going to be a problem, since intrinsics can't be overloaded on arbitrary user types (e.g. structs)? Is there anything about the analysis that breaks if we bitcast the operand to i8* and then bitcast the result back to the actual type? Is this question eventually being mooted by the Great Pointer-Typing Change? :) http://reviews.llvm.org/D9403 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@cs.uiuc.edu http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
