* Andrew Pinski: >> If what you propose is the only way out, and there is no way to make >> GCC optimizers reasonable, then I believe Paul's proposal is the next >> option. > > But that still does not address the issue is that this is not just about > GCC any more since autoconf can be used many different compilers and is right > now. So if you change autoconf to default to -fwrapv and someone comes alongs > and tries to use it with say ACC (some made up compiler right now). The loop > goes into an infinite loop because they treat (like GCC did) signed type > overflow > as undefined, autoconf still becomes an issue.
Does autoconf enable higher optimization levels for other compilers by default? (BTW, I would be somewhat disappointed if this had to be pampered over on the autoconf side. If the GNU project needs -fwrapv for its own software by default, this should be reflected in the compiler's defaults. I wish more C programs could be moved towards better conformance, but this could be unrealistic, especially in the short term.)
