[RFC][PATCH 0/5] arch: atomic rework

Linus Torvalds torvalds@linux-foundation.org
Mon Feb 10 02:04:00 GMT 2014

On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 5:46 PM, Torvald Riegel <triegel@redhat.com> wrote:
> IOW, I wrote that such a compiler transformation would be wrong in my
> opinion.  Thus, it should *not* return 42.

Ahh, I am happy to have misunderstood. The "intuitively" threw me,
because I thought that was building up to a "but", and misread the

I then react stronly, because I've seen so much total crap (the
type-based C aliasing rules topping my list) etc coming out of
standards groups because it allows them to generate wrong code that
goes faster, that I just assume compiler people are out to do stupid
things in the name of "..but the standard allows it".


More information about the Gcc mailing list