Falk Hueffner wrote:
>
> It doesn't know that. The warning is for the *creation* of the
> type-punned pointer, which is still perfectly fine. Gcc is too stupid
> to notice whether you actually dereference it.
>
Yup. There are billions of this constructs in everbodies
and his moms source files. By
Andrew Pinski wrote:
>
> Wrong, try again. Violating aliasing rules cause undefined behavior
> so seg faulting is an okay thing to do.
But producing a warning message and bad code is not OK. Either
using a "type-punned pointer" should be treated as a fatal
error, because gcc would create bad code
Andrew Pinski wrote:
>
> Stop right there, you said it warns, well this is a case where
> you are violating C89/C99/C++ aliasing rules so it is a bug in your
> code and not in GCC.
>
This is not my code. It is XFree86 4.3. I am just trying to
help by investigating a problem and providing an easy t
Hi folks,
The attached testcase dies on Debian (amd64) if
compiled with -O2.
Here is the usual data:
% gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: x86_64-linux
Configured with: ../src/configure -v
--enable-languages=c,c++,java,f95,objc,ada,treelang --prefix=/usr
--libexecdir=/usr/lib --enable-shared
