https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86350
martin <mscfd at gmx dot net> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |mscfd at gmx dot net
--- Comment #5 from martin <mscfd at gmx dot net> ---
@kargl: "Rather odd to need an option to get standard conforming
behavior."
I do not understand this sentence. From what you cited from the standard it is
clear that it is not necessary to call function bar() from your example, but
the compiler is allowed to do so. Hence evaluating bar() is definitely standard
conformant. Not evaluating it is also standard conformant. This is not a nice
situation allowed by the standard.
But in my opinion, a compiler aiming for portability should definitely always
call bar() if the standard allows this, even if it might mean a missed
optimisation. If the programmer is keen on such optimisations, the code can
easily be rewritten to take advantage of not calling bar if the first operand
is zero.
