On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Michael Lotz <mmlr@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > As far as I've understood the subject (and I really hope I got it > right) the problem could be demonstrated by a code snippet: > > double someDouble = 0.0; > int someInt = *(int *)&some; I assume the second line is meant to be: int someInt = *(int *)&someDouble; Right? > I'd be interested in comments on that topic before applying anything > though. Is my understanding of the problem correct at all, do we care > about those optimizations and how would others suggest we move forward > with that? I am certainly not a compiler expert and don't have the time now to research this aliasing issue, but I do recall hearing how Rene Gollent cannot get a stable Haiku on his hardware when compiling with GCC4. So it might be related to this issue or other alignment issues messing up driver code and therefore causing a crash. So until we can really dig into these issues it might be smart to go easy on the optimizations. Ryan