Hi Alex > On a side note, these might also show up in Coverity if that goes > through... A more permanent fix than disabling the warnings and > strict > aliasing might be better in the long run. Nobody's desputing that, it's just a lot of work that can't reasonably be done right now. But it's not disabling the warnings, it's disabling the optimizations that potentially produce this kind of unexpected code until we have the time to fix the code. > Could some of these aliasing conflicts be avoided by using unions? Yes that is the usual way of handling it (and explicitly allowed by the standard). While it is a little clumsy to always use a union to do an otherwise "simple conversion", it is the way to write code that can take advantage of the strict aliasing rules for optimization. Regards Michael