https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92229
Ariel Torti <arieltorti14 at gmail dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
--- Comment #5 from Ariel Torti <arieltorti14 at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #4)
> On Sat, 26 Oct 2019, arieltorti14 at gmail dot com wrote:
>
> You can write an asm to access a flag, it will just be whatever value the
> flag has for whatever code the compiler found matched the language-level
> semantics of your code, which may have nothing to do with your notion of
> what the flag "should" be.
>
> Language semantics are only matched to processor features at ABI
> boundaries, not within functions (and not across calls to inline / static
> functions etc. either, because those aren't ABI boundaries; any good
> language feature in this area also needs to work in the presence of
> multiple functions, and of inlining and similar transformations, not just
> where the arithmetic is in the same function as the code that cares about
> whether it overflowed).
Fair point, I can see why it would be very problematic, didn't really knew the
full scope when I considered the issue.
