On Wed Nov 27, 2013 at 09:04:49, Paul Wise wrote: > On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 6:44 AM, Stefan Roas wrote: > > > Such code has never been valid and any assumption anyone may falsely have > > on such code is outright wrong. Such code may do anything, which includes > > nothing so IMHO it's perfectly ok for the optimizer to throw it away. > > After all we'd be better of not relying on something that is "undefined". > > The problem with that attitude is that it results in C programmers > never fixing their code and never even knowing that it is wrong > because the compiler never rejected their code or at the very least > provided a warning. Not everyone knows everything about C and that is > why we have compiler warnings. Every use of undefined behaviour should > at minimum result in a compiler warning.
Point taken. A compiler warning would indeed be nice in those cases. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-security-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20131127165102.GA5388@aldebaran
