> From: Georg Bauhaus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Paul Schlie wrote: >> - How is it necessary or desirable to define that the result is undefined >> vs. being target defined? > > What does C say about how a target performs an instruction? > And why shouldn't GCC take advantage of this?
- In essence I believe the difference is consistency. Where although a target implementation defined behavior seems no more clear, it implies that the semantics of an operation in question should directly result from it's target implementation, and any corresponding compile-time constant propagation optimizations should be consistent with their otherwise run-time computed counterparts, as otherwise they will be needlessly and arguably erroneously inconsistent; which an undefined behavior would seem to allow, without providing any tangible benefit.
