Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!brl-adm!brl-smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: `noalias' vs `register'
Message-ID: <6858@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Date: 17 Dec 87 20:28:05 GMT
References: <8712170057.AA17035@decwrl.dec.com>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 10

In article <8712170057.AA17035@decwrl.dec.com> devine@cookie.dec.com (Bob Devine) writes:
>In article <6833@brl-smoke.ARPA> gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>) writes:
>  A better way, in hindsight, would have been to have a 'alias' keyword
>that designates those cases where multiple handles are used; all other
>cases could then be assumed to be optimizable.  Too late.

It was always too late for that!
Existing practice (e.g. K&R C) requires that unqualified declarations
behave as though pointer aliasing might be occurring (because it might).
The default has to be "safe" behavior to agree with current C.