https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67204
Manuel López-Ibáñez <manu at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 from Manuel López-Ibáñez <manu at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #5)
> (In reply to smagnet from comment #3)
> > Moreover, the undefined behavior sanitizer runtime options (UBSAN_OPTIONS,
> > as described here
> > <https://www.chromium.org/developers/testing/undefinedbehaviorsanitizer>)
> > aren't documented at all in the manual.
>
> UBSAN_OPTIONS isn't currently supported by GCC.
These kind of divergences give reason to think that the sanitizers should be
further documented in the GCC manual. Another example is the range of supported
platforms: GCC's sanitizer could in principle support different ones (more?
fewer?) than Clang's.
I'm not saying that anyone should stop working on what they are doing to
implement this, but if a volunteer appears (Smagnet?) and wants to work on
this, why not allow them? Perhaps they can create better documentation than the
official one.
