--- Comment #6 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-08 17:55 ---
I think the consensus is clear on what needs to be done. So this is confirmed.
Just needs someone to do it. Unfortunately, given the huge amount of open
issues, I would guess that making undefined code work is quite dow
--- Comment #5 from dirtyepic at gentoo dot org 2007-03-27 01:49 ---
I was referring to what the user gets to experience at runtime.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31359
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-26 17:18 ---
> It does silently crash, for all intents and purposes.
No, it is not silent at all, it warns loudly (you cannot turn off the warning
except by using -w).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31359
--- Comment #3 from dirtyepic at gentoo dot org 2007-03-26 14:27 ---
All true. But this report is not about openssl, it's about GCC purposely going
out of it's way to break undefined code for no good reason. It does silently
crash, for all intents and purposes. I'm not saying that's n
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-26 10:13 ---
openssl is a weird beast of macro hell ;) (enough reason to fix it...)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31359
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-26 06:01 ---
Can you show the exact code from openssl which has the problem, there might be
better ways of writting the code instead of what they are doing right now.
This code is still undefined and I don't think we really shou
