Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!sundc!pitstop!sun!amdcad!ames!umd5!brl-adm!brl-smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: (So-Called) ANSI C
Message-ID: <6981@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Date: 8 Jan 88 05:24:15 GMT
References: <11135@brl-adm.ARPA> <6965@brl-smoke.ARPA> <7561@elsie.UUCP>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 17

In article <7561@elsie.UUCP> ado@elsie.UUCP (Arthur David Olson) writes:
>> Now is the time to repair serious deficiencies, only.
>And what *major* deficiency is it that "noalias" repairs?

First, my remark was aimed at changes to the second review draft,
not necessarily those that went into it.  A substantive change to
the specifications at this point would necessitate a third public
review, thereby delaying publication of the standard, which is
sorely needed as soon as possible, so long as it is consistent and
"good enough".  Of course, if it contains serious technical errors
they will have to be repaired.

Second, "noalias" addressed the deficiency that prohibited vendors
from being able to exploit vector hardware and from exploiting
other significant opportunities for code optimization.  You may
not particularly care about this (in fact I don't), but many people
did.