hfinkel added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D32199#732382, @rjmccall wrote:
> If you're going to try to enforce the declared type of memory, you'll also > need something like the C effective type rule to handle char buffers in C++. > As far as I can tell, it's not actually legal under the spec to cast an array > of chars to an arbitrary type and access it that way — you have to do > something to establish that there's an object of that type there first. > If you memcpy'ed into that buffer from an object of the right type, that > would be sufficient to create a new formal object of that type, but I don't > see any way to sensibly apply that rule to e.g. the POSIX "read" function. > It seems to me that you at least need to have a rule saying that it's okay to > access a formal object of type char/char[] using an arbitrarily-typed l-value. I agree. That's exactly what the current implementation does (I get that for free from our TBAA setup). I get this for free from the TBAA scheme because the current checks are symmetric (just like the TBAA checks in the optimizer). I had wondered whether this symmetry was an over-approximation in some cases, but perhaps it is not. https://reviews.llvm.org/D32199 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
