=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier <[email protected]>,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier <[email protected]>,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier <[email protected]>,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier <[email protected]>,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier <[email protected]>,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier <[email protected]>
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To: <llvm.org/llvm/llvm-project/pull/[email protected]>


jmorse wrote:

Hi,

Agreeing with @apple-fcloutier, another facet of this discussion is the fact 
that there are programming environments where the ship of Boolean-strictness 
sailed many years ago, and un-updatable, closed-source, illegal Booleans 
producing software exists which must be interacted with. As mentioned above and 
in the discourse thread, the Sony SDK environment is one of these -- it's not 
something we can discourage or negotiate away. This flag is a pragmatic fix to 
shield newly compiled code from software written in the past, without which we 
really do get crashes occasionally. I feel documentation and defaults is better 
for discouraging new illegal-Boolean environments, than mandatory undefined 
behaviour.

Illegal Booleans being detectable by UBSan is a pretty good fence against the 
propagation of these values today, and gives a much better user experience when 
things go wrong than baking (permitted) assumptions into compiled code.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/160790
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to