On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 5:11 AM, Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddh...@redhat.com> wrote: > > I understand that the behaviour is undefined, but this is easily > avoidable by skipping removal of the exits if it results in an infinite > loop. Attached patch does exactly that.
I don't mind saying that GCC should define cases that the language standards leave undefined. But that does not seem to be what this patch does. I don't see why this is a good idea. It seems to produce a program that is unpredictable in a different way. How does that help the user? If anything an infinite loop might be better, since it is more obvious that something is wrong. Unless I misunderstand. Ian
