https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103502
Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6 from Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> The documentation
> (https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Warning-Options.html#Warning-Options)
> for the warning is clear here:
> "Takes care of the common pun+dereference pattern in the front end:
> *(int*)&some_float. "
>
> >3 is documented as the most precise option
>
> I think you misunderstood what precise means in this context really.
> "Higher levels correspond to higher accuracy (fewer false positives). "
-Wstrict-aliasing is kind of confusing in this regards since it's different
from how other warnings with numerical levels work. Normally a higher numerical
value to a warning option means "print more warnings" but for -Wstrict-aliasing
it means "try harder to reduce the number of warnings". Perhaps this is an
inconsistency that should be rectified?
