> and btw, there is no question what-so-ever about whether your compiler
Pedant: valid. Almost all optimizations are legal, nobody has yet written
laws about compilers. Sorry but I'm forever fixing misuse of the word
"illegal" in printks, docs and the like and it gets annoying after a bit.
Agreed - the standard is not ambiguous here. (For reference the standard
says that a valid pointer must point at an object _OR_ one past the end
of the object (in the latter case it is not dereferencable)). So its a
compiler bug.
Alan
-