Friendly weekly ping.
On Mon, Apr 18, 2022 at 10:15:47AM +0300, Mikhail wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 16, 2022 at 07:18:47AM -0600, Daniel Dickman wrote:
> >
> >
> > > On Apr 14, 2022, at 11:49 AM, Stuart Henderson <[email protected]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > My thinking is that, if the code has behaviour which is considered
> > > undefined by the C standard assumed by the compiler, no level of
> > > optimization is safe. Maybe now you get lucky and -O works (on whichever
> > > architecture you've tested) but I don't think it's reasonable to assume
> > > that this is the case everywhere, or will be the case following compiler
> > > updates.
> >
> > I haven't looked very deeply at epic but if the note is referring to
> > strict aliasing then I would follow the advice about sticking to -O.
> >
> > John Regehr wrote up a nice piece on this a few years ago:
> >
> > https://blog.regehr.org/archives/1307
>
> We have a decade or even more when we didn't hear any random crashes
> reports with '-O', and FreeBSD has it as a default flag.
>
> Epic developer takes crash reports seriously, when I had "openbsd only
> crash" he helped me with it. Also, he wasn't against adding unveil and
> pledge.
>
> Anyway, if there is a proposition not to take any risk - probably it
> worth it, performance isn't critical thing for an IRC client.
>
