[llvm-dev] Redundant load in llvm's codegen compares to gcc when accessing escaped pointer?

[Daniel Berlin via llvm-dev]

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Than McIntosh <thanm at google.com> wrote:

> The rationale given does not seem to square (IMHO) with the ubiquitous
> practice of having 0- or 1-length array at the end of a struct and then
> allocating additional elements for it using malloc, or the so-called
> "struct hack":
>

GCC doesn't break this, AFAIK.

Or at least, the last time i broke it, i had to make it not break it :)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160323/db4743d7/attachment.html>