basic VRP min/max range overflow question

[Robert Dewar]

Paul Schlie wrote:

> - an optimization which presumes the execution state of a program does not
> proceed past a sequence point. but in fact does, may result in erroneous
> behavior; which would be the case if NULL pointer comparisons were optimized
> away presuming an earlier pointer dereference would have prevented execution
> from proceeding past it's enclosing sequence point if in fact it does not.

This is just plain wrong I am afraid, you are making things up, the undefined
state, plus as-if semantics, allows the optimizer to assume that the value is
anything it likes and propagate this information forward. Perhaps nothing can
convince you otherwise, but I can assure you that the people writing the
standard do not have in mind the odd reading you are pushing.