public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/30475] assert(int+100 > int) optimized away
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 17:12:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070117171201.10474.qmail@sourceware.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-30475-3511@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
------- Comment #19 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-17 17:12 -------
Again your code is broken to the standard and the comp.lang.c faq mentions a
way to not dependent on the undefined code so this again is not really a bug.
The question about security is what do you trust, the inputs or the outputs?
Really what you are saying with your current code, you trust the inputs but not
the outputs. What the code given in the comp.lang.c faq does is not trust the
inputs. I am sorry that you wrote broken code to begin with but given you are
writting C+signedintegeroverflowaswrapping code and not C (and GCC is a C
compiler), GCC breaks your code.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Severity|critical |normal
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |WONTFIX
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30475
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-01-17 17:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-01-15 19:43 [Bug c/30475] New: " felix-gcc at fefe dot de
2007-01-15 19:46 ` [Bug c/30475] " felix-gcc at fefe dot de
2007-01-15 19:47 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-01-15 19:50 ` felix-gcc at fefe dot de
2007-01-15 19:57 ` felix-gcc at fefe dot de
2007-01-15 20:04 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-01-16 4:47 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-01-16 7:00 ` pluto at agmk dot net
2007-01-16 7:24 ` gcc at mailinator dot com
2007-01-17 13:55 ` felix-gcc at fefe dot de
2007-01-17 14:26 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-01-17 14:31 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-01-17 15:21 ` felix-gcc at fefe dot de
2007-01-17 16:32 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-01-17 16:37 ` felix-gcc at fefe dot de
2007-01-17 16:54 ` erdgeist-gcc at erdgeist dot org
2007-01-17 16:57 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-01-17 17:03 ` felix-gcc at fefe dot de
2007-01-17 17:06 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-01-17 17:12 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org [this message]
2007-01-17 17:14 ` amacleod at redhat dot com
2007-01-17 17:20 ` felix-gcc at fefe dot de
2007-01-17 17:42 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-01-17 18:23 ` felix-gcc at fefe dot de
2007-01-17 18:43 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-01-17 19:04 ` felix-gcc at fefe dot de
2007-01-17 19:18 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-01-18 15:20 ` felix-gcc at fefe dot de
2007-01-18 15:24 ` felix-gcc at fefe dot de
2007-01-18 17:36 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-01-21 8:58 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-01-21 12:23 ` andreas at andreas dot org
2007-01-21 12:49 ` andreas at andreas dot org
2007-01-21 13:53 ` felix-gcc at fefe dot de
2007-01-21 16:31 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-01-21 17:30 ` andreas at andreas dot org
2007-01-21 17:47 ` felix-gcc at fefe dot de
2007-01-21 18:16 ` pluto at agmk dot net
2007-01-21 19:46 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-01-21 20:14 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-01-21 21:52 ` tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-01-22 2:18 ` felix-gcc at fefe dot de
2007-01-22 2:27 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-01-22 13:02 ` felix-gcc at fefe dot de
2007-01-22 17:15 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-01-22 18:26 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-01-22 18:33 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-01-22 18:36 ` andreas at andreas dot org
2007-01-22 19:50 ` felix-gcc at fefe dot de
2007-01-22 20:16 ` ian at airs dot com
2007-01-22 22:27 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-01-22 23:10 ` andreas at andreas dot org
2007-01-23 0:46 ` kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-08 1:03 ` js at linuxtv dot org
2007-03-08 1:14 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-08 16:23 ` js at linuxtv dot org
[not found] <bug-30475-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2014-02-16 10:00 ` jackie.rosen at hushmail dot com
2021-01-05 12:26 ` daniel.marjamaki at gmail dot com
2021-01-05 12:56 ` daniel.marjamaki at gmail dot com
2021-01-05 13:30 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-05 13:37 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-06 10:37 ` daniel.marjamaki at gmail dot com
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20070117171201.10474.qmail@sourceware.org \
--to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).