On 31 December 2006 18:47, Paul Eggert wrote:
> "Daniel Berlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The question is not whether GCC should support wrapv
> semantics; it already does, if you specify -fwrapv.
> The question is merely whether wrapv should be the default
> with optimization levels -O0 through -O2.
Maybe we need to make it a trinary, like -Wstrict-aliasing. Then we would
turn on -fwrapv=1 at -O2, and we would only need to argue about which
wrap-assuming optimisations were suitable for level 1 and which weren't.
cheers,
DaveK
--
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....
