Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "foo_caller".
2013 Mar 13
3
[LLVMdev] PROPOSAL: struct-access-path aware TBAA
...dict to the assumption --
It promote the p->x expression.
If I fabricate a caller by stealing some code from your previous
example, see bellow.
I think these code & your previous example (about placement new) share
the same std. I'm wondering
if gcc can give a correct result.
foo_caller() {
T1 t1;
T1 *pt1;
T2 *pt2 = new (pt1) T2;
foo(pt1, pt2);
}
2013 Mar 13
0
[LLVMdev] PROPOSAL: struct-access-path aware TBAA
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 11:59 PM, Shuxin Yang <shuxin.llvm at gmail.com> wrote:
> I personally believe that in the context of type-based AA, correctness is a
> subjective term:-).
>
> If the user smell something fishy, it is up to user to disable such opt,
> there is no other
> way around. TBAA is just to find the a sweet spot between precision &
> safeness.
Sorry,
2013 Mar 13
2
[LLVMdev] PROPOSAL: struct-access-path aware TBAA
I personally believe that in the context of type-based AA, correctness
is a subjective term:-).
If the user smell something fishy, it is up to user to disable such opt,
there is no other
way around. TBAA is just to find the a sweet spot between precision &
safeness.
Unfortunately, in the context of TBAA, precision & safeness usually come
at each other's expense...
It would be