Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [config] RFC PR 82
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-11-26 06:51:51

On 2015-11-26 05:13, Agustín K-ballo Bergé wrote:
> On 11/25/2015 10:52 PM, Andrey Semashev wrote:
>> IMHO, the standard should just
>> follow C11 semantics and say it more clearly.
> That's unlikely to happen, C has *vastly* weaker aliasing rules than
> C++, to the point that several C implementations choose to follow the
> C++ rules instead. You'd be asking for the opposite to happen.

I can see the benefits of strict aliasing rules in other contexts, but
unions specifically exist to provide the common storage for objects of
different types in a relatively less messy way compared to, e.g. a raw
byte buffer. I'm not seeing people using unions and somehow expecting
type aliasing to not happen, quite the contrary. I think the language
here is being too limiting for no practical reason.

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at