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.

Reply via email to