https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79518
--- Comment #4 from Evan Nemerson ---
I agree that GCC's implementation makes more sense, but unfortunately it makes
it hard to write portable code.
I'm not suggesting the current behavior be abandoned, only that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79518
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79518
--- Comment #2 from Evan Nemerson ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Why can't you use:
> #define __assume_aligned(arg, align) arg = __builtin_assume_aligned
> (arg, align)
>
> ?
arg may be read-only.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79518
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Why can't you use:
#define __assume_aligned(arg, align) arg = __builtin_assume_aligned (arg,
align)
?