[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <521CB8F7.6050507@gentoo.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2013 16:34:31 +0200
From: Luca Barbato <lu_zero@...too.org>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Optimized C memset
On 27/08/13 16:21, Rich Felker wrote:
> If you're saying testing __has_may_alias__ rather than __GNUC__ buys
> us more portability, I don't see a reason to believe this. A
> hypothetical non-GNUC compiler might need an actual pointer variable
> (rather than cast through a pointer type with may_alias on it) to
> avoid the aliasing violation, or it might require a special attribute
> on the function indicating that the whole function has immunity from
> the aliasing rules, or any number of other possibilities.
You might decouple the two:
- support may_alias
- safe to compile code that may alias
Just that the latter is harder to check.
lu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
