This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug c++/11376] [3.3/3.4 regression] mozilla-1.4 miscompiled
- From: "bangerth at dealii dot org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 8 Jul 2003 23:55:49 -0000
- Subject: [Bug c++/11376] [3.3/3.4 regression] mozilla-1.4 miscompiled
- References: <20030630081619.11376.sirl@gcc.gnu.org>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11376
------- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2003-07-08 23:55 -------
I sympathize with your comments (since we have the same problem with
different compilers on different platforms, etc, although we don't have
to go back to gcc2.7...). Just one remark:
> Programmers generally don't understand all the rules (especially cases where
> behavior is undefined) of the language standards.
I certainly agree. On the other hand, note that it is not actually
trivial to trip over aliasing rules -- you have to actively cheat on the
compiler, by using reinterpret_casts etc. We get quite a number of reports
with invalid code like that, so type safety doesn't seem to be very
high on the list for quite a number of programmers (how sad). I wonder
what cases these people are working around when you say you hand optimize
code that way. We'd certainly like to see such code in our "optimization"
section of bugzilla.
And don't forget to submit you gcc bug report :-)
Thanks
Wolfgang