------- Comment #21 from felix-gcc at fefe dot de 2007-01-17 17:20 -------
I DID NOT WRITE THE BROKEN CODE.
Trying to trivialize the issue or insult me will not make it go away.
So, please tell me, which part of the argument in comment #9 were you unable to
follow? I could try using less complicated words so you actually understand it
this time around.
Guys, your obligation is not just to implement the C standard. Your obligation
is also not to break apps that depend on you. And A LOT of apps are depending
on you. When you broke the floating point accuracy, you made it opt-in
(-ffast-math). When you added the aliasing breakage, you made it opt-in
(-fstrict-aliasing). IIRC for that you also quoted some legalese from the
standard at first, until people with more grounding in reality overruled you.
And I'm going to keep this bug open until the same thing happens again for this
issue.
You can't just potentially break of the free software in the world because you
changed your mind about what liberty the C standard gives you. Grow up or move
out of the way and let more responsible people handle our infrastructure.
You know that the Ariane 5 rocket crashed (and could have killed people!)
because of an int overflow? What if people die because you decided the C
standard allows you to optimize away other people's security checks?
Again: IT DOES NOT MATTER WHAT THE C STANDARD SAYS. You broke code, people are
suffering damage. Now revert it. The least you can do is make -fwrapv on by
default. You would still have to make it actually work (I hear it's broken in
some corner cases?), but that's another story.
--
felix-gcc at fefe dot de changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|WONTFIX |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30475
