Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c > #16236

Re: Repeated types in union

Show all headers | View raw

"christian.bau" <christian.bau@cbau.wanadoo.co.uk> writes:

> On Dec 12, 7:09 pm, Jens Gustedt <jens.gust...@loria.fr> wrote:
>
>> If I remember correctly the aliasing rules state that the compiler is
>> allowed to assume that a and b (insided the function) point to different
>> objects because they are of different types. Thus in the second
>> assignment to *a the compiler can assume that *a is still 3 and store 5
>> in place.
>
> You are right. On the other hand, footnote 82 says:
>
> "If the member used to access the contents of a union object is not
> the same as the member last used to store a value in the object, the
> appropriate part of the object representation of the value is
> reinterpreted as an object representation in the new type as described
> in 6.2.6 (a process sometimes called "type punning"). "
>
> Which is a direct contradiction. I am assuming that the rules for
> union members apply in the same way whether the compiler knows that it
> is accessing different members of the same union or not.

It isn't a contradiction because of how the objects are
accessed is different in the two cases.  When a member
is accessed (ie, using '.' or '->') the effective type
is determined by the declared type of the member.
When an object is accessed through a pointer, there
is no declared type, so the rule for what the effective
type is or must be is different.

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Repeated types in union Edward Rutherford <edward.p.rutherford79@REMOVETHIS.gmail.com> - 2011-12-10 22:06 +0000
  Re: Repeated types in union Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2011-12-11 00:11 +0100
  Re: Repeated types in union Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-12-10 18:14 -0500
    Re: Repeated types in union Edward Rutherford <edward.p.rutherford79@REMOVETHIS.gmail.com> - 2011-12-12 20:09 +0000
      Re: Repeated types in union Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2011-12-12 23:45 +0100
      Re: Repeated types in union Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-12-12 19:48 -0500
        Re: Repeated types in union "christian.bau" <christian.bau@cbau.wanadoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-13 15:17 -0800
          Re: Repeated types in union Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-12-13 15:29 -0800
          Re: Repeated types in union James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-12-13 18:30 -0500
          Re: Repeated types in union Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2011-12-14 17:40 +0100
          Re: Repeated types in union Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-25 13:28 -0800
        Re: Repeated types in union Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-25 15:04 -0800
    Re: Repeated types in union ralph <nt_consulting64@yahoo.net> - 2011-12-12 14:50 -0600
    Re: Repeated types in union Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-25 14:53 -0800
  Re: Repeated types in union Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2011-12-10 22:04 -0800
    Re: Repeated types in union "christian.bau" <christian.bau@cbau.wanadoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-12 09:49 -0800
      Re: Repeated types in union Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2011-12-12 20:09 +0100
        Re: Repeated types in union "christian.bau" <christian.bau@cbau.wanadoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-13 15:10 -0800
          Re: Repeated types in union Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2011-12-14 00:24 +0100
          Re: Repeated types in union Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-25 13:46 -0800
      Re: Repeated types in union Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-25 13:42 -0800
    Re: Repeated types in union Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-25 13:36 -0800

csiph-web