Re: GCC Undefined Behavior Sanitizer

[monarch_dodra via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 17 October 2014 at 13:44:24 UTC, ketmar via 
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 09:46:48 +0000
via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:
In D (and C++) you would get:
if (x < ((x+1)&0xffffffff)){…}
perfect. nice and straightforward way to do overflow checks.

Besides, the code uses x + 1, so the code is already in undefined 
state. It's just as wrong as the "horrible code with UB" we wère 
trying to avoid in the first place.

So much for convincing me that it's a good idea...