[issue15144] Possible integer overflow in operations with addresses and sizes.

[Mark Dickinson]

Mark Dickinson <dickinsm at gmail.com> added the comment:

If we're worrying about undefined behaviour, it looks like recent optimizations have *introduced* new undefined behaviour in the form of strict aliasing violations.  E.g., from ascii_decode:

    unsigned long value = *(const unsigned long *) _p;

(here _p has type const char *).  This should really be fixed;  compilers are known to make optimizations based on the assumption that this sort of undefined behaviour doesn't occur.

----------

_______________________________________
Python tracker <report at bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue15144>
_______________________________________