Hello Walter,
bearophile wrote:
I'm confused. It appears you want to write unsafe code and yet have it
be guaranteed safe.
Currently the described code is legal, unsafe (it can result in invalid pointers)
and has undefined semantics (it can result in unpredictable, implementation
defined results). What I think bearophile wants is for only the last to be
changed, that is; you can still do things that result in invalid pointers,
but it does so in a well defined way (at least with regards to the bit pattern
the pointer ends up as)
--
... <IXOYE><
