Is this expected gcc behaviour?

[Urs Thuermann]

Jay Monkman <jtm-list-crossgcc@smoothsmoothie.com> writes:

> When I compile this function:
>      extern unsigned long ptr;
> 
>      int func(void)
>      {
>          unsigned long val = (unsigned long)&ptr;
> 
> 	 if (val == 0) {
> 	     return 1;
>          } else {
>              return 0;
>          }
>      }
> 
> with any optimization level > 0, I get this:
>     func:
>         clr.l %d0
>         rts

This behavior of gcc is correct.  The C standard guarantees that no
object can be located at address 0, i.e. the result of the address
operator on any object is always different from the null pointer.

urs

------
Want more information?  See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/
Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com