lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Jan]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] C undefined behavior fix
Date

jbuck@synopsys.COM said:
> > An ICE, while it's not quite what was expected and it'll probably get
> > fixed, is nonetheless a perfectly valid implementation of 'undefined
> > behaviour'.

> Not for GCC it isn't. Our standards say that a compiler crash, for
> any input whatsoever, no matter how invalid (even if you feed in line
> noise), is a bug. Other than that we shouldn't make promises, though
> the old gcc1 behavior of trying to launch a game of rogue or hack when
> encountering a #pragma was cute.

True - sorry, I forgot where this was crossposted. I didn't mean to imply
that GCC folks would _accept_ an ICE and not fix it - just that strictly
speaking, it is a perfectly valid response, as is the unintended observed
behaviour of the output code which actually started this thread.

--
dwmw2


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:15    [W:0.063 / U:0.216 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site