From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org)
	by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <gentoo-amd64+bounces-13023-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
	id 1QcSB1-0006TM-Ha
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 01 Jul 2011 01:05:47 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 515D71C0ED;
	Fri,  1 Jul 2011 01:04:36 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from qmta08.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net (qmta08.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net [76.96.30.80])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 074861C0A4
	for <gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri,  1 Jul 2011 01:04:35 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from omta01.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.11])
	by qmta08.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast
	id 2R4Z1h0020EPchoA8R4ZTl; Fri, 01 Jul 2011 01:04:33 +0000
Received: from ajax ([24.11.47.14])
	by omta01.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast
	id 2R4m1h0160JMh7c8MR4oc9; Fri, 01 Jul 2011 01:04:50 +0000
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 21:04:29 -0400
From: Frank Peters <frank.peters@comcast.net>
To: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: GCC-4.5.2 Has Serious Problems
Message-Id: <20110630210429.fbcd8904.frank.peters@comcast.net>
In-Reply-To: <iuj1o7$o6s$2@dough.gmane.org>
References: <20110630174530.9bcbcd47.frank.peters@comcast.net>
	<iuj17v$o6s$1@dough.gmane.org>
	<iuj1o7$o6s$2@dough.gmane.org>
X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.1.1 (GTK+ 2.24.5; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-amd64+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-amd64+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-amd64+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-amd64.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Archives-Salt: 
X-Archives-Hash: 22909ecfc1d4ee7c05a66c9715a40807

On Fri, 01 Jul 2011 02:44:36 +0300
Nikos Chantziaras <realnc@arcor.de> wrote:

> 
> And here you can read more thorough information about strict aliasing:
> 
>    http://labs.qt.nokia.com/2011/06/10/type-punning-and-strict-aliasing
> 

You've saved the day in more ways than one.

A few days ago I posted about a possible problem with a floating
point test called the UCBTEST.  After examining the source code
of this test, I see violations of aliasing rules throughout.
It's hard to efficiently manipulate variables without them.

Of course, this code was written before the C99 standard and
so is exempt.  But the use of "-fno-strict-aliasing" will
apply with the UCBTEST as well.

Thanks again for the information.

Frank Peters