Re: [PATCH] Fix a few incorrect accesses.

On 12/7/22 05:08, Thomas Schwinge wrote: Hi Andrew! On 2022-12-02T09:12:23-0500, Andrew MacLeod via Gcc-patches wrote: This consists of 3 changes which stronger type checking has indicated are non-compliant with the type field. I'm curious what that "stronger type checking" is? Remnants

Re: [PATCH] Fix a few incorrect accesses.

linux-gnu with no regressions. OK for trunk? > > Andrew > From d1003e853d1813105eef6e441578e5bea9de8d03 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Andrew MacLeod > Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2022 13:07:28 -0500 > Subject: [PATCH] Fix a few incorrect accesses. > > This consists of 3 changes

Re: [PATCH] Fix a few incorrect accesses.

On 12/2/22 09:52, Richard Biener wrote: On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 3:13 PM Andrew MacLeod via Gcc-patches wrote: This consists of 3 changes which stronger type checking has indicated are non-compliant with the type field. I doubt they are super important because there has not been a trap trigger

Re: [PATCH] Fix a few incorrect accesses.

On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 3:13 PM Andrew MacLeod via Gcc-patches wrote: > > This consists of 3 changes which stronger type checking has indicated > are non-compliant with the type field. > > I doubt they are super important because there has not been a trap > triggered by them, and they have been in

[PATCH] Fix a few incorrect accesses.

trap anyway, just silently never trigger. Bootstraps on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu with no regressions.  OK for trunk? Andrew From d1003e853d1813105eef6e441578e5bea9de8d03 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Andrew MacLeod Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2022 13:07:28 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] Fix a few incorrect accesses.