From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19776 invoked by alias); 16 Jan 2007 18:01:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 19441 invoked by alias); 16 Jan 2007 18:01:35 -0000 Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 18:01:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20070116180135.19440.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug c/30477] Integer Overflow detection code optimised away, -fwrapv broken In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "gdr at cs dot tamu dot edu" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2007-01/txt/msg01301.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #14 from gdr at cs dot tamu dot edu 2007-01-16 18:01 ------- Subject: Re: Integer Overflow detection code optimised away, -fwrapv broken "rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org" writes: | We do weight between cost and result which is a reason we keep branches in | active maintainance for a long time. But we need to focus on where the | majority of our users are, which is gcc 4.1 nowadays. Fully agreed. We must however do something about the integer overflow thingy, because we stillface the needs of our user base. -- Gaby -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30477