> Date: Wed, 10 May 2023 14:41:27 +0200 > Cc: jwakely....@gmail.com, fwei...@redhat.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org, > ar...@aarsen.me > From: Gabriel Ravier <gabrav...@gmail.com> > > >>> Because GCC is capable of compiling it. > >> That is not a good argument. GCC is capable of compiling any code in all > >> the reported accepts-invalid bugs on which it doesn't ICE. That doesn't > >> mean those bugs shouldn't be fixed. > > Fixing those bugs, if they are bugs, is not the job of the compiler. > > It's the job of the programmer, who is the one that knows what the > > code was supposed to do. If there's a significant risk that the code > > is a mistake or might behave in problematic ways, a warning to that > > effect is more than enough. > > Are you seriously saying that no accepts-invalid bug should ever be > fixed under any circumstances on the basis that some programmers might > rely on code exploiting that bug ??
Sorry, I'm afraid I don't understand the question. What are "accepts-invalid bugs"? In any case, I was not not talking about bug-compatibility, I was talking about being able to compile code which GCC was able to compile in past versions. Being able to compile that code is not a bug, it's a feature.
