https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89479
--- Comment #5 from Eyal Rozenberg <eyalroz at technion dot ac.il> --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4) > exposing __restrict to the IL). Is "IL" an acronym for "Intermediate Language"? Remember many bug posters/readers are not GCC developers and don't know all the lingo. > To elaborate further to successfully mark a function call > with clique == 1 and base == 0 we have to prove the pointer marked restrict > doesn't escape the function through calls Certainly, calling g() could be just the same as writing to an alias of the x pointer. But - __restrict is how we guarantee this doesn't happen (or can be ignored) even when the compiler can't prove that's the case on its own. So I'm not sure I understand what you're suggesting with your comment. I suppose you could try and "disprove the __restrict" to give a warning, but other than that - why not just respect it?
