------- Comment #5 from olivier dot aumage at labri dot fr 2006-02-04 10:17 ------- (In reply to comment #2) > It looks like we have an interaction between the alignment attribute and the > IA64 calling conventions. In this example GCC is treating my_t type as an > aligned pointer and not as a pointer to aligned data. Is that what you > intend?
Well, I did not really intend anything since I first stumbled on this "behaviour" with a buggy code which _unintentionnaly_ presented this pattern. Since this behaviour was a bit surprising, I derived a minimal example code from my buggy code and reported it here, as it might be a sign of internal GCC bug. I'm only stating that this behaviour is surprising. It is not necessarily wrong (if it is not triggered by an internal bug, of course). By reading the various comments posted here, I have now the feeling that it might be something similar to "*(char *)NULL=1;", that is, compiled correctly, but potentially not "valid" in a given execution environment. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25372
