This is the mail archive of the gcc-help@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]

Re: Is it OK that gcc optimizes away overflow check?

From: Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>
To: noloader at gmail dot com
Cc: Agner Fog <agner at agner dot org>, gcc-help at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2011 23:07:23 -0700
Subject: Re: Is it OK that gcc optimizes away overflow check?
References: <4E2B2B72.9050504@agner.org> <CAH8yC8=cwCuoP5bh8dPVUA12KwpqT2-OobhRGt6XD+BzA83pTQ@mail.gmail.com>

Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> writes:

> Its really too bad that GCC does not offer something for overflow and
> carry. There's been a couple of feature requests for overflow and
> carry testing when the CPU supports it, but I don't believe its gained
> any momentum (what does that say about secure programming practices?):
>  * http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48580
>  * http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49467

I apologize for the cliched response, but gcc is free software.  This
kind of feature is typically implemented by the person who cares the
most.  Perhaps you could be that person.

Ian

References:
- Is it OK that gcc optimizes away overflow check?
  - From: Agner Fog
- Re: Is it OK that gcc optimizes away overflow check?
  - From: Jeffrey Walton

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]