Paul Eggert wrote:
> assume(X) uses __builtin_trap only in GCC versions 3.3.4 through 4.4.7
OK, so the problem diminishes over time. Fine.
Bruno
Bruno Haible wrote:
Would it be possible to use abort () instead of __builtin_trap ()?
It would, but I'm not sure it'd be a good idea, as assume(X) is not intended to
be a safety check: it's intended to be a message from the programmer to static
analysis tools such as GCC's optimizer and/or w
Hi Paul,
> # define assume(R) ((R) ? (void) 0 : __builtin_trap ())
Would it be possible to use abort () instead of __builtin_trap ()?
__builtin_trap has the drawback that is provides this message:
Illegal instruction (core dumped)
(at least on x86_64)
which points to user/developer to a bug
