On Sun, 6 Aug 2017, JonY via Mingw-w64-public wrote:
On 08/05/2017 09:14 PM, Martin Storsjö wrote:
This helps finding unimplemented functions; otherwise the symbol
will exist, but won't contain any implementation, so the function
will end up pointing at whatever other function the linker places
I would agree with Martin; I think it's a very good practice for
source files to have an error or not define a function instead of
defining a function that can't possibly work and letting the build
proceed with a broken function. Compiler and linker errors are much
easier to figure out than segmen
>
> What I meant is that if GCC's optimizer ever figures out that we are
> comparing pointers that came from two different memory objects, it
> would know we are doing undefined behavior and would have a license to
> do whatever it wants, including removing that code. The way the loop
> is written
I thought my last email explained it pretty well. The optimizer can
do any kind of transformation it wants on the code as long as it
doesn't change the behavior of well-defined programs. You seem to be
stuck on the "__used__" attribute but that's not relevant to my
argument.
--David
On Sun, Aug
On 08/06/2017 02:59 PM, David Grayson wrote:
> I would agree with Martin; I think it's a very good practice for
> source files to have an error or not define a function instead of
> defining a function that can't possibly work and letting the build
> proceed with a broken function. Compiler and li
