On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 6:44 AM, Stefan Roas wrote: > Such code has never been valid and any assumption anyone may falsely have > on such code is outright wrong. Such code may do anything, which includes > nothing so IMHO it's perfectly ok for the optimizer to throw it away. > After all we'd be better of not relying on something that is "undefined".
The problem with that attitude is that it results in C programmers never fixing their code and never even knowing that it is wrong because the compiler never rejected their code or at the very least provided a warning. Not everyone knows everything about C and that is why we have compiler warnings. Every use of undefined behaviour should at minimum result in a compiler warning. PS: Debian has a build log scanner for reporting compiler warnings to developers: http://qa.debian.org/bls/ -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAKTje6Fw=Mer+gXu4KJrNic=m0opor1rcpg-eadecnxb9wv...@mail.gmail.com
