Re: [PATCH] C undefined behavior fix

From: Joe Buck (jbuck@synopsys.COM)
Date: Wed Jan 02 2002 - 17:39:13 EST said:
> > (and for CONSTANT < 5 it of course generated correct code to fill dst
> > with string contents; and yes, I know that code will sigsegv on run
> > because of dst is not initialized - but it should die at runtime, not
> > at compile time).
> An ICE, while it's not quite what was expected and it'll probably get fixed,
> is nonetheless a perfectly valid implementation of 'undefined behaviour'.

Not for GCC it isn't. Our standards say that a compiler crash, for any
input whatsoever, no matter how invalid (even if you feed in line noise),
is a bug. Other than that we shouldn't make promises, though the old gcc1
behavior of trying to launch a game of rogue or hack when encountering a
#pragma was cute.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 07 2002 - 21:00:18 EST