(original) (raw)

\> It would require semantic changes to llvm ir to fix this to properly
\> express object lifetimes that is compatible with all the random babble
\> standards have written down :)
\> For now, the only sane solution IMHO, is to say that no alias implies
\> pointer inequality, regardless of the standards. Because the above can
\> occur in any situation noalias exists but they are allowed to be pointer
\> equal (as mentioned, it's trivial to make this happen in TBAA).

Just to be clear, you're suggesting that we no longer mark malloc's
return value as noalias?