* Paul Schlie: >> No they should be using -ftrapv instead which traps on overflow and then >> make sure they are not trapping when testing. > > - why? what language or who's code/target ever expects such a behavior?
I think Andrew wants programmers to fix their code, instead of papering over problems. 8-) All code has seen wide testing essentially with -fwrapv enabled because in previous GCC version, -fwrapv had only a limited effect, especially across multiple statmeents. That's why I don't prefer the -ftrapv approach, even though its technically the correct one. It's a real pity that we have to trust so much C code which has been written and reviewed by developers who aren't aware that signed integer overflow is undefined.
