This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Signed int overflow behaviour in the security context
> Suddenly rejecting all that code, or making it generate a different
> result, would not serve the community/society.
Sure, but that wasn't the issue I was addressing.
I was addressing the claim that we allegedly have people writing security-
and/or safety-critical software who don't understand the semantics of that
language as they relate to safety and security (namely, what overflows do).
That's a serious problem. Of course, there's not a whole lot that we
as compiler writers can do with it (hence my smiley).