public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "ian at g0tcd dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c/59933] for loop goes wild with assert() enabled Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 16:12:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-59933-4-ODmOGOnO8L@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-59933-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59933 --- Comment #9 from Ian Hamilton <ian at g0tcd dot com> --- Yes, that's all proper and correct. The invalid C code induces undefined behaviour. I don't think anyone is disputing that. However, to be pragmatic for a moment, the experience of thousands of developers out there, working with legacy code, and trying to update their toolset to include gcc 4.8 is that code which compiled without warnings and worked with the old gcc compiler now still compiles without warnings, but fails at runtime with the 4.8 series compiler. Sometimes, the runtime failures are occasional and difficult to track down if (for example) it lies on an error handling path. This makes it even harder for these developers to figure out what's going on. If the compiler could provide a warning when it encounters this sort of invalid code, that would be a good thing, as it would highlight the old latent bugs and give developers the opportunity to fix them. However, it doesn't, so the developers working on legacy code really have no alternative to either using the -fno-aggressive-loop-optimizations switch to stabilse their legacy code (even assuming they understand what's happening), or sticking with the old version of the compiler. So I think the request to the gcc developers is to find a way of providing a compiler warning when the loop optimiser encounters problem code, to give developers a fighting chance of debugging their legacy code.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-02-19 16:12 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2014-01-24 12:56 [Bug c/59933] New: " warnerme at ptd dot net 2014-01-24 13:00 ` [Bug c/59933] " warnerme at ptd dot net 2014-01-29 12:25 ` ian at g0tcd dot com 2014-01-29 13:14 ` ian at g0tcd dot com 2014-02-19 8:36 ` mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-02-19 12:27 ` warnerme at ptd dot net 2014-02-19 14:08 ` warnerme at ptd dot net 2014-02-19 14:54 ` mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-02-19 15:49 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-02-19 16:12 ` ian at g0tcd dot com [this message] 2014-02-19 16:41 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-02-19 20:57 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-02-20 1:00 ` ian at g0tcd 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=bug-59933-4-ODmOGOnO8L@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --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: linkBe 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).