On Tuesday, June 04, 2013 00:57:09 Timothee Cour wrote: > What are his arguments against an opt-in flag such as > version=check_arithmetic_overflow ?
I'm sure that you can find his arguments in a number of threads that have discussed integer overflow. And if you want to get the situation changed, you're going to have to talk him into it. Discussing it with me isn't going to help you any. He's against it primarily for performance reasons and doesn't want to add it in non-release mode any more than he wants to add checks for null pointers/references in non-release mode. He also dislikes having lots of compiler flags, so it's generally very difficult to talk him into anything that requires a new compiler flag. And as I pointed out before, there are _zero_ cases where -version is used to enable compiler-defined versions. If it were added as a new flag it would be something like -checkoverflow and not as a version identifier. -version is only for user-defined versions identifiers. - Jonathan M Davis
