Re: [PATCH] C undefined behavior fix

From: dewar@gnat.com
Date: Wed Jan 09 2002 - 20:22:29 EST


Peter said

<<Then the code can be optimized to 'b = 0;' since nowhere in the scope
of 'a' does anyone take its address(which would allow it to be changed).
Of course if 'a' is external then another function can access its
address.
>>

Well if nothing else this shows that there is still significant disagreement.
I consider Peter's statement to be 100% wrong here, optimizing away the
access to b would be a clear violation of the standard. I thought that
the argument had been made in a clear and convincing manner, but apparently
some people completely refuse to be convinced!
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 15 2002 - 21:00:30 EST