------- Comment #39 from dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-03 12:54 ------- (In reply to comment #38)
> The name, and all the documentation, which say they cannot be > addressed, which means they cannot be pointed to by any pointer, which > means they are unaliased. > Absolutely. If the Ada FE somehow wants these two predicates to generate *more* VDEF/VUSE chains, then there is something fundamentally wrong with it. The meaning of these two predicates is the exact opposite, they will lead to *fewer* VDEF/VUSE chains. > > I'm not saying that this is a sane design or that we should try to replicate > > it in GCC 4, I'm just saying that for the time being struct aliasing totally > > overlooks this mechanism and doesn't work for Ada because of that. > Okay, and i'm saying i don't plan on accepting fixes that appear to > hack around well accepted infrastructure to try to fix symptoms. > Really. That's all. I'm not going to approve patches that randomly > skip fields because it seems to get the right result sometimes. If > you want to try to explain what all this is actually trying to do, i'm > happy to work with you to come up with a sane solution. > Agreed. The Ada FE should either change or prove that there is a design/implementation flaw in the aliasing machinery. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25737
