> I believe f could do:
> assert (arg != "aoeuaoeuaeouaeouaoeuaoeaoxbxod");
> which would then fail with the proposed optimization. It is unspecified if
> two string literals with the same content are distinct objects, but foo must
> be
> a distinct object (ok, with static const char foo[] =
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47980
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-03-03
21:59:50 UTC ---
I believe f could do:
assert (arg != "aoeuaoeuaeouaeouaoeuaoeaoxbxod");
which would then fail with the proposed optimization. It is unspecified if
two string literals with the same
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47980
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47980
--- Comment #2 from Rafael Avila de Espindola 2011-03-03 21:50:07 UTC ---
I agree that the code is correct. The bug is because of a missing optimization,
not about wrong behavior.
The only use of foo is passing it function expecting a const point
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47980
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
