On Mon, 20 Jan 2020, Alexander Monakov wrote: > Hi, > > we have this paragraph in the documentation that attempts to prohibit > something that is allowed by the language. Instead, I think we should > say that this generally should work and explain that a problem in GCC > implementation breaks this.
Is this based on the proposals to adopt a PNVI model (as described in N2362 / N2363 / N2364) for C2x? Do you have a more detailed analysis of exactly which issues would need changes in GCC to follow the proposed PNVI-ae-udi semantics? Setting up a meta-bug in Bugzilla with dependencies on such issues might be useful, for example - I know there are existing bugs you've filed or commented on, but it would help to have a list in a single place of issues for implementing PNVI-ae-udi. It's not obvious that documentation relating to things that are implementation-defined in existing C standard versions, where detailed memory model questions were not defined, is an appropriate place to discuss questions of how some optimizations might not follow a more precise definition proposed for C2x. -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com
