Paul Schlie wrote:
- an optimization which presumes the execution state of a program does not proceed past a sequence point. but in fact does, may result in erroneous behavior; which would be the case if NULL pointer comparisons were optimized away presuming an earlier pointer dereference would have prevented execution from proceeding past it's enclosing sequence point if in fact it does not.
This is just plain wrong I am afraid, you are making things up, the undefined state, plus as-if semantics, allows the optimizer to assume that the value is anything it likes and propagate this information forward. Perhaps nothing can convince you otherwise, but I can assure you that the people writing the standard do not have in mind the odd reading you are pushing.
