Message-ID: <3816FF74.6CCD5AC@softhome.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 15:34:44 +0200
From: Laurynas Biveinis <lauras AT softhome DOT net>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: lt,en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: gcc-2.95.2
References: <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 991027131905 DOT 28265E-100000 AT is>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-4
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 27 Oct 1999 pavenis AT lanet DOT lv wrote:
> 
> > One change is that -fstrict-aliasing is no more enabled by default (I
> > myself put '%{!no-strict-aliasing: -fstrict-aliasing}' in specs to
> > have that still enabled).
> 
> Is this a good idea?  If the GCC maintainers decided to not enforce
> strict aliasing, why should we?  AFAIK, this feature can subtly break
> lots of code.

IMHO, strict aliasing is A Good Thing and breaking the code once and
forever is better than supporting it for years and years... -fstrict-aliasing
was present in EGCS from 1.1, and people were warned, 'this optimization will
be on by default starting from next EGCS version...'. But it seems that
only few people actually tried it with their code to see if it still works.
I don't think that many people will fix their code now, they will complain
about this optimization in the next GCC version. So this does not
solve issue.

(Hopefully, the next GCC version will feature a warning about incorrect
aliasing)

Laurynas Biveinis