> This patch is OK.
Thanks.
> I wish somebody could fix the existing documentation for this attribute
> to use the present tense instead of the future to describe GCC's current
> behavior, though :-S
I think it's a common idiom: if you do this, then the compiler will do that.
I can see it i
> Isn't this kind of implied by the already documented restriction of
> taking the address of a union field? Still, you can add this or any kind
> of similar language if you like.
It's stronger I think since you can do type punning without taking an address.
--
Eric Botcazou
On 01/21/2016 09:34 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
Tested on x86_64-suse-linux, OK for the mainline?
2016-01-21 Eric Botcazou
* doc/extend.texi (scalar_storage_order type attribute): Document
restriction on type punning and aliasing.
This patch is OK.
I wish somebody could fix
On 01/21/2016 05:34 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
Tested on x86_64-suse-linux, OK for the mainline?
2016-01-21 Eric Botcazou
* doc/extend.texi (scalar_storage_order type attribute): Document
restriction on type punning and aliasing.
Isn't this kind of implied by the already doc
