zygoloid wrote: > @zygoloid Can you explain in your example why `a.n == 2` must be true, when > your interpretation (which I understood in the same manner) of the standard's > wording does indicate that the object's state is unspecified?
My reading is that the standard says that the value of `a.n` after `*p = 1;` is unspecified, but after `n = 2;` the value of `a.n` is 2. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136792 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
