Re:The Strict Aliasing Situation Is Pretty Bad
by TorKlingberg on Tuesday March 15, 2016 @09:19AM
(#11289350)
If you do this
and then use both base and derived, is that not violating aliasing rules?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:The Strict Aliasing Situation Is Pretty Bad
by haberman on Tuesday March 15, 2016 @09:44AM
(#11289513)
Pretty sure it's safe! Take this program:
typedef struct {
int x;
} Base;
typedef struct {
Base base;
int y;
} Derived;
int f(Base* b, Derived* d) {
b->x = 0;
d->base.x = 1;
return b->x;
}
Notice that if we are accessing the base members of "d", we are still accessing them through a struct of type "Base" (d->base.x). If we compile this with strict aliasing, you can see the output is allowing that the two might alias (while this isn't a proof, it's a strong indication that this is aliasing-correct). 0000000000000000 <f>:
0: c7 07 00 00 00 00 mov DWORD PTR [rdi],0x0
6: c7 06 01 00 00 00 mov DWORD PTR [rsi],0x1
c: 8b 07 mov eax,DWORD PTR [rdi]
e: c3 ret
Re:The Strict Aliasing Situation Is Pretty Bad
by vc98mvco on Tuesday March 15, 2016 @09:53AM
(#11289580)
It is defined.
6.5.7. An object shall have its stored value accessed only by an lvalue expression that has one of the following types:
- an aggregate or union type that includes one of the aforementioned types among its members (including, recursively, a member of a subaggregate or contained union)
This means Derived is allowed to alias Base.
Re:The Strict Aliasing Situation Is Pretty Bad
by TorKlingberg on Tuesday March 15, 2016 @10:43AM
(#11289946)
Thanks, this is good to know.