This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.
| Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
|---|---|---|
| Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
| Other format: | [Raw text] | |
On Fri, 2006-11-10 at 23:05 -0800, Howard Chu wrote:
Daniel Berlin wrote:
If you know the code is not legal, why don't you abort the compilation with an error code?We ask the TBAA analyzer "can a store to a short * touch i. In this case, it says "no", because it's not legal.
The code is legal but undefined at runtime.
There was a defect report to the C standard about undefined code at runtime and rejecting that code and the C standard committee decided it was not a defect. http://std.dkuug.dk/JTC1/SC22/WG14/www/docs/dr_109.html
Here is the rational from that Defect report about not rejecting the
undefined behavior:
A conforming implementation must not fail to translate a strictly
conforming program simply because some possible execution of that
program would result in undefined behavior. Because foo might never be
called, the example given must be successfully translated by a
conforming implementation.
-- -- Howard Chu Chief Architect, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc OpenLDAP Core Team http://www.openldap.org/project/
| Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
|---|---|---|
| Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |