|Re: Loop Optimizations and Gotos firstname.lastname@example.org (1995-11-22)|
|alias analysis (was Loop Optimizations and Gotos) bwilson@shasta.Stanford.EDU (Bob Wilson) (1995-11-28)|
|Re: alias analysis (was Loop Optimizations and Gotos) email@example.com (1995-11-29)|
|alias analysis (was Loop Optimizations and Gotos) firstname.lastname@example.org (Dave Lloyd) (1995-12-09)|
|Re: alias analysis (was Loop Optimizations and Gotos) email@example.com (1995-12-12)|
|Re: alias analysis (was Loop Optimizations and Gotos) firstname.lastname@example.org (1995-12-17)|
|From:||email@example.com (John Carr)|
|Date:||12 Dec 1995 14:33:58 -0500|
|Organization:||Massachusetts Institute Of Technology|
|References:||95-11-198 95-11-228 95-12-044|
|Keywords:||C, Fortran, optimize, comment|
Dave Lloyd <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>Well it seems to me that C could easily acquire a new "storage-class",
>say "independent" (after the HPF equivalent) which when applied to a
>pointer means "the storage at the end of this pointer is only
>accessible via this pointer within this scope".
The draft ANSI C standard had this feature (called "noalias" instead
of "independent"). It was withdrawn after strong objection (I don't
remember all the reasons, but lack of existing implementations was one).
John Carr (email@example.com)
[Inability to define the semantics was the other. -John]
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.