I believe we're on the same page now. (I assume in the following that where you wrote `strict`, you meant `restrict`.)
I now understand the standard such that it implies that promises made by `restrict` must be upheld in the whole program and distinctions between caller and callee are irrelevant. Both must cooperate such that the promises remain true.
As for the given code for `uwu`, I also believe the first version is allowed and the second is not. Since the second is the result of (hypothetical proposed) optimizations, the latter may not be applied even though they seem fine on the surface.
So we must have a way to determine when optimizations may be applied and imbuing pointer-to-integer casts with side effects certainly fixes this situation. It seems like a sound approach, but I do hope for a formal analysis, of course.
I now understand the standard such that it implies that promises made by `restrict` must be upheld in the whole program and distinctions between caller and callee are irrelevant. Both must cooperate such that the promises remain true.
As for the given code for `uwu`, I also believe the first version is allowed and the second is not. Since the second is the result of (hypothetical proposed) optimizations, the latter may not be applied even though they seem fine on the surface.
So we must have a way to determine when optimizations may be applied and imbuing pointer-to-integer casts with side effects certainly fixes this situation. It seems like a sound approach, but I do hope for a formal analysis, of course.