Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 10:41:39 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Nate Eldredge <nate AT cartsys DOT com>
cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: No more warnings...
In-Reply-To: <37969D4B.609FBC62@cartsys.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.990722104109.14732A-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On Wed, 21 Jul 1999, Nate Eldredge wrote:

> Incidentally, one of the big changes with gcc 2.95 is that the ANSI
> aliasing rules are now strictly enforced by default.

Do I understand correctly that compiling the library with and without
strict aliasing and comparing the resultant code would reveal the
places that could break?  If so, we should probably do that once we
switch to EGCS.

FWIW, I don't think we have dangerous code like that in the library,
at least not lots of it.