>>> Re-fix r136172 so it isn't an error; apparently, some people are fond of >>> their undefined behavior. >> >> Would it be practical to emit something like an llvm_unreachable, call >> to terminate, or other "bad stuff has happened here" kind of code >> instead? > > Apparently real-world code uses this construct. See also r136180.
Right - the point made in r136180 is that it's UB to run the code, but not erroneous to have the code, which sounds like a perfect case for llvm_unreachable, if it's practical to emit it in this case. Unless you're saying real-world code is depending on the specific current behavior of LLVM when that code is executed (ie: they're actually invoking UB & depending on it doing something in particular) which sounds highly dodgy, but I wouldn't put it past someone. I'm not sure what the LLVM/clang project's stance on such situations is. - David _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
