This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the libstdc++ 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: [patch] Enable lightweight checks with _GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS.

On 09/10/2015 10:38 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
On 09/10/2015 06:30 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 09/09/2015 09:58 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
On 09/08/2015 05:45 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:

I doubt we can achieve the complexity goals in all cases.  I expect

   for (int i = 0; i < 10000; ++i) {

is optimized away in default mode, but with _GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS, it is

The last time I looked at this, GCC was unable to move bounds checks
of loops.

Maybe we don't want to make _FORTIFY_SOURCE imply _GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS
then, so they can be enabled independently. We don't have to make that
decision right away.

I think we should try with _FORTIFY_SOURCE first.  The above case looks
rather artificial.  If there is a visible performance impact, maybe we
can get the compiler to eliminate the vector bounds checks in many cases.

There is quite a bit of documentation of _FORTIFY_SOURCE that explains
its effect on user code.

I think there are only random blog articles discussing aspects of it,
most of them slightly incorrect or outdated.

_FORTIFY_SOURCE is a GLIBC feature test macro. It's documented
in <features.h> and mentioned in some of its online manuals.
For example:

or here:


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