[LLVMdev] LLVM 2.4 problem? (resend)

[Eli Friedman]

On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 7:04 AM, David Vandevoorde
<daveed at vandevoorde.com> wrote:
>
> On Oct 16, 2008, at 12:22 AM, Eli Friedman wrote:
> [...]
>>> The current consensus among CoreWG experts is that the words in the
>> current standard (and those in the current WP) do not require distinct
>> variables and temporaries to have distinct addresses per se.
>>
>> Then what's the alternative model?
>
>
> That if two complete objects can never be distinguished by observing
> their value, then they may be allocated at the same address.

That's an extremely difficult model to deal with, even ignoring that
it might break user code.  It isn't too difficult to write a program
where two complete objects can be distinguished by observing their
value if and only if they are allocated at the same address.

-Eli