https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83954
--- Comment #5 from Dan Bonachea <dobonachea at lbl dot gov> --- (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #4) > > Assuming it's the latter, can anyone suggest any non-intrusive workarounds? > > (aside from the obvious "big hammers" of -fno-lto or -fno-strict-aliasing) > > Yes, the warning should not produce bogus warnings. Proper solution is not > to break strict aliasing. Note that it can help optimization to make more > aggressive optimizations. I'm confused - are you saying the test program actually breaks C's strict aliasing rules? My understanding was this is a correct (spec-compliant) C program that is being mishandled by gcc. My question was whether this mishandling could generally result in actual incorrect optimization of programs encountering this defect, and it sounds like you are saying it might?
