Since your example doesn't correspond to any actual usage of FFTW,
it's not clear to me how you think it is relevant.
Regards,
Steven G. Johnson
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.or
On Friday 30 October 2009, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> Steven G. Johnson wrote:
> >> Whether or not such aliasing is safe is entirely dependent on
> >> implementation-defined behavior, the standard leaves it undefined.
> >
> > This is not true. Matteo already quoted the portion of the C st
> Whether or not such aliasing is safe is entirely dependent on
> implementation-defined behavior, the standard leaves it undefined.
This is not true. Matteo already quoted the portion of the C standard
that specifically requires double complex and double[2] to have
exactly the same binary re
On Friday 09 October 2009, Matteo Frigo wrote:
> Your bug report implies that calling fftw from a program that
> #include's causes a violation of the aliasing rules,
> because fftw is compiled with fftw_complex = double [2] and the
> program is compiled with fftw_complex = double _Complex. I cont
Yes, I understand that you can write a program that breaks the
aliasing rules. However, this is not what this bug report is about.
Your bug report implies that calling fftw from a program that
#include's causes a violation of the aliasing rules,
because fftw is compiled with fftw_complex = doubl
On Monday 28 September 2009, Frank Mori Hess wrote:
> The
> strict aliasing rules allow compilers to make optimizations that assume
> pointers to different types will not access the same memory. I'll try
> to produce a test program soon.
Attached is an example program that shows undefined behavio
On Monday 28 September 2009, Matteo Frigo wrote:
> > Frank Hess wrote:
> > > This means if a user doesn't include fftw3.h first, before any
> > > possible inclusion of complex.h, then his code may be using a
> > > different ABI than that of the libfftw3.so provided by debian.
>
> This is false. [N
> Frank Hess wrote:
>
> > This means if a user doesn't include fftw3.h first, before any
> > possible inclusion of complex.h, then his code may be using a
> > different ABI than that of the libfftw3.so provided by debian.
This is false. [N843, 6.2.5 Types, verse 13]:
Each complex type has th
severity 534722 normal
forwarded 534722 f...@fftw.org
thanks
Hello Frank,
The upstream authors are included in this thread.
Frank Hess wrote:
> Package: libfftw3-dev
> Version: 3.1.2-3.1
> Severity: important
>
> FFTW3 has a mis-design feature where if complex.h is included before fftw3.h
> (m
Package: libfftw3-dev
Version: 3.1.2-3.1
Severity: important
FFTW3 has a mis-design feature where if complex.h is included before fftw3.h
(maybe indirectly and
unintentionally through another header) then the header changes the definition
of
the "fftw_complex" types (without doing any mangling t
10 matches
Mail list logo
