Re: [PATCH][2.6.6-rc3] gcc-3.4.0 fixes

[H. Peter Anvin]

Mikael Pettersson wrote:
> You're assuming pointers have uniform representation.
> C makes no such guarantees, and machines _have_ had
> different types of representations in the past.
>

By the way, I am not in any shape, way or form making that assumption - 
although that's presumably how it would be *implemented* in an architecture 
with sane pointers like, to the best of my knowledge ALL gcc targets.

(foo *)bar++;

... should be implemented as ...

({
	foo *tmp1 = (foo *)bar;
	tmp2 = tmp1 + 1;
	bar = __typeof__(bar)tmp2;
	tmp1;
})

	-hpa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/