Is the strict aliasing rule incorrectly specified?

Question

As previously established, a union of the form

union some_union {
    type_a member_a;
    type_b member_b;
    ...
};

with n memb

Answer 1

The strict aliasing rule forbids access to the same object by two pointers that do not have compatible types, unless one is a pointer to a character type:

7 An object shall have its stored value accessed only by an lvalue expression that has one of the following types:88)

• a type compatible with the effective type of the object,
• a qualified version of a type compatible with the effective type of the object,
• a type that is the signed or unsigned type corresponding to the effective type of the object,
• a type that is the signed or unsigned type corresponding to a qualified version of the effective type of the object,
• an aggregate or union type that includes one of the aforementioned types among its members (including, recursively, a member of a subaggregate or contained union), or
• a character type.

In your example, *f = 1.0; is modifying fi.i, but the types are not compatible.

I think the mistake is in thinking that a union contains n objects, where n is the number of members. A union contains only one active object at any point during program execution by §6.7.2.1 ¶16

The value of at most one of the members can be stored in a union object at any time.

Support for this interpretation that a union does not simultaneously contain all of its member objects can be found in §6.5.2.3:

and if the union object currently contains one of these structures

Finally, an almost identical issue was raised in defect report 236 in 2006.

Example 2

// optimization opportunities if "qi" does not alias "qd"
void f(int *qi, double *qd) {
    int i = *qi + 2;
    *qd = 3.1;       // hoist this assignment to top of function???
    *qd *= i;
    return;
}  

main() {
    union tag {
        int mi;
        double md;
    } u;
    u.mi = 7;
    f(&u.mi, &u.md);
}

Committee believes that Example 2 violates the aliasing rules in 6.5 paragraph 7:

"an aggregate or union type that includes one of the aforementioned types among its members (including, recursively, a member of a subaggregate or contained union)."

In order to not violate the rules, function f in example should be written as:

union tag {
    int mi;
    double md;
} u;

void f(int *qi, double *qd) {
    int i = *qi + 2;
    u.md = 3.1;   // union type must be used when changing effective type
    *qd *= i;
    return;
}