On Sunday 17 July 2011 12:02:45 tlaro...@polynum.com wrote: > My woe is more that an optimization can say "this may improve speed (or > may not, even slow down processing...)": OK. But an optimization > that can break a program, that is an optimization whose correctness > is not guaranteed, is something I can't understand why it is even > proposed (since I fail to see why someone would be happy to have > more rapidly an incorrect result, that can even not be said to be close > to the correct one for some epsilon...).
optimizations make it more likely to trip over undefined behavior -- one that `was-somehow-working' without it. http://blog.llvm.org/2011/05/what-every-c-programmer-should-know_14.html http://blog.llvm.org/2011/05/what-every-c-programmer-should-know_21.html -- dexen deVries > (...) I never use more than 800Mb of RAM. I am running Linux, > a browser and a terminal. rjbond3rd in http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2692529
