rjmccall added a comment. In D62825#1542301 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D62825#1542301>, @rsmith wrote:
> In D62825#1542247 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D62825#1542247>, @rjmccall wrote: > > > In what sense is the bit-pattern of a null pointer indeterminate? > > > The problem is not null pointers, it's `nullptr_t`, which is required to have > the same size and alignment as `void*` but which comprises only padding bits. > (Loads of `nullptr_t` are not even permitted to touch memory...). I mean, I know this is C++ and the committee loves tying itself in knots to make the language unnecessarily unusable, but surely the semantics of bitcasting an r-value of type `nullptr_t` are intended to be equivalent to bitcasting an r-value of type `void*` that happens to be a null pointer. Repository: rC Clang CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D62825/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D62825 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
