On 24 April 2010 03:06, Ian Lance Taylor <iant@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Alexey Salmin <alexey.salmin@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> However if we add a "restrict" keyword to the definition of b like >> that it affects nothing: > > >> As far as I understand the "restrict" concept "const int *restrict b" >> guarantee that "*b" will not be modified by "*a++ = *b + 1;". > > I believe you are correct, and that this is an unimplemented > optimization. Therefore, you should open a PR about it in bugzilla please. Otherwise, I will get overlooked. Cheers, Manuel.
