[LLVMdev] LLVM 2.4 problem? (resend)

Duncan Sands baldrick at free.fr
Wed Oct 15 06:43:28 PDT 2008

> True, but note that it is the address of a variable that is used, not  
> the value.

Yes, but why do you think they should get a different address?  I can
understand that it is surprising that they do, but determining whether
this is legal or not requires reading the language standard.  Hopefully
a language lawyer can chime in and say whether this transform is valid
or not.



More information about the llvm-dev mailing list