This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH][4.3] Deprecate -ftrapv
Mark Mitchell <email@example.com> writes:
> [...] You seem to be focusing on making -ftrapv capture 100% of
> overflows, so that people could depend on their programs crashing if
> they had an overflow. That might be useful in two circumstances:
> (a) getting bugs out (though for an example like the one above, I
> can well imagine many people not considering that a bug worth
> fixing), and (b) in safety-critical situations where it's better to
> die than do the wrong thing.
Are you including in "safety-critical" all the security-related
software, where signed-overflow is a popular exploit? If so, you are
undervaluing the "better to die than do the wrong thing" principle.
(This has come up several times here in the past, but not recently