http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60819
--- Comment #13 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> --- On April 12, 2014 10:30:31 AM CEST, "glisse at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: >http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60819 > >--- Comment #12 from Marc Glisse <glisse at gcc dot gnu.org> --- >Created attachment 32586 > --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32586&action=edit >Richard's small patch > >I regtested it (patch from comment #9 plus a testcase) on >x86_64-linux-gnu and >it passed. I think we should go with this in the short term. Would you >care to >handle it? Or should I post it for review by Joseph/Jason? I'll handle it. Plus i'll look into the expansion issue. >The array-based expansion (for later) would require the same may_alias >treatment. may_alias morally belongs to TYPE_QUALS (like >const/volatile, it is >safe to add, not to remove) and it is logical to propagate it in the >same >place.
