On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 9:00 PM, Peter Kasting <pkast...@google.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Craig Schlenter
> <craig.schlen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I'm one try-server run away from possibly turning -fno-strict-aliasing on
>> for
>> all linux/bsd gcc: http://codereview.chromium.org/519034
>>
>> From a "process" standpoint, given that there is some disagreement here
>> is someone going to come find me with a clue bat if I commit this?
>
> I don't think anyone will be rabid :)
> That said, my comment in my prior email stands: if we're basically capable
> of throwing -fstrict-aliasing for first-party code now, what do we gain by
> instead throwing -fno-strict-aliasing? I would be sad to see us do this
> unless it really buys us something.
Other than the immediate gain of "hiding" crbug.com/28749, I think the biggest
benefit is that end users relying on 4.4 builds are likely to have a more stable
experience in future since it is a safe default. The PPA ubuntu builds
from fta are
already running with no_strict_aliasing=1 btw.
The other thing it buys us is a more relaxed timetable to solve the aliasing
problems if it doesn't break the tree by default.
Anyway, I think I'll commit this and then go hide somewhere :)
--Craig
--
Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe:
http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
