On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 12:09:40AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 12:34:01AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > When passing pointers to 4-byte types to memcpy(), gcc-4.0 generates
> > wrong code which assumes that these pointers are aligned at 4-byte
> > boundaries for purpose
On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 12:34:01AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> When passing pointers to 4-byte types to memcpy(), gcc-4.0 generates
> wrong code which assumes that these pointers are aligned at 4-byte
> boundaries for purposes of optimization, ignoring the implicit cast to
> (char *) in the prot
On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 02:45:41PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> By any chance, can you provide a reference to the C spec that shows
> gcc's current behavior is valid? Given that traceroute is among the
> programs that breaks under gcc-4.0, it seems to me that the assumption
> that it's safe to u
On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 02:08:17PM +0200, Falk Hueffner wrote:
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb am 30.08.05
> 09:49:30:
> > When passing pointers to 4-byte types to memcpy(), gcc-4.0 generates
> > wrong code which assumes that these pointers are aligned at 4-byte
>
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb am 30.08.05
09:49:30:
> When passing pointers to 4-byte types to memcpy(), gcc-4.0 generates
> wrong code which assumes that these pointers are aligned at 4-byte
> boundaries for purposes of optimization, ignoring the implicit cast t
Package: gcc-4.0
Version: 4.0.1-2
Severity: important
When passing pointers to 4-byte types to memcpy(), gcc-4.0 generates
wrong code which assumes that these pointers are aligned at 4-byte
boundaries for purposes of optimization, ignoring the implicit cast to
(char *) in the prototype of memcpy()
6 matches
Mail list logo
