------- Comment #17 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-27 20:43 ------- > Your analogy is helpful, but a bit like comparing apples with oranges. The > reason being that the compiler executes integer overflow loops identically for > all optimization settings.
Is it? unsigned integers don't overflow by definition. They wrap. Now signed integers overflow and change with different optimization levels. That is what I was trying to compare with this case, not unsigned integer wrapping. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42810
