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]

Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)


On Tue, 28 Jun 2005, Robert Dewar wrote:

> are preserved. For instance on the IBM mainframe one might use signed
> or unsigned operations to implement int operations. On the original
> MIPS one might use trapping or non-trapping arithmetic (either would
> be valid).

Does -ftrapv ever take advantage of trapping instructions where the 
hardware has them available?

Does anyone make substantial use of -ftrapv in production (whether as a 
tool for detecting bugs, or as a security tool where the performance cost 
is acceptable)?  Or is it still at the stage of being a tool which would 
be useful in principle for some purposes but still needs some work 
(including on optimizing checks to reduce the performance cost) to make it 
useful in practice?

-- 
Joseph S. Myers               http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~jsm28/gcc/
    jsm@polyomino.org.uk (personal mail)
    joseph@codesourcery.com (CodeSourcery mail)
    jsm28@gcc.gnu.org (Bugzilla assignments and CCs)


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