http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45586
--- Comment #73 from Mikael Morin <mikael at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-07-30 12:29:33 UTC --- (In reply to comment #72) > > (In reply to comment #63) > > > That's bogus as TYPE_FIELDS > > > is supposed to be shared amongst variant types. > > > > Then we'll have to revert Micha's recursive restrict work. > > I don't think so, it merely has to be fixed. How so? by making it non-recursive? For variable to be type compatible for assignment, they shall be variants of the same type, and thus have the same TYPE_FIELDS. If they shall have the same TYPE_FIELDS, they shall have the same components, the same components have the same types, so that one cannot be restrict qualified. > > > Is it possible for the front-end to specify alias sets by hand (I mean > > without > > relying on the middle-end computing them based on types etc)? > > Yes. But that does not work with LTO, You mean calling the front-end's code does not work at LTO time or the alias sets are not saved/restored for LTO? > nor does it address the original > issue of supporting INTENT IN/OUT properly. Ah? Isn't a restricted type variable (resp. component, etc) merely one that has its own alias set? So if it works with restrict, it works with alias sets?
