Looking for counterexample: My C code never uses pointer casts, volatile, memcpy (etc.), unions, so it never violates strict aliasing rules.
-
-
Eh yeah I didn't want to work too hard to avoid padding issues. I assume you can avoid that with newtypes of int?
-
struct X{ a: int; } struct Y{ b: int }; struct Foo { struct X x; struct Y y; }; Can't possibly have padding?
-
I'm not so sure about that. Regardless, I think it makes sense to add a qualifier "assuming common-sense pointer math & indexing."
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.