* Daniel Berlin: > OTOH, people who rely on signed overflow being wraparound generally > *know* they are relying on it. > Given this seems to be some small number of people and some small > amount of code (since nobody has produced any examples showing this > problem is rampant, in which case i'm happy to be proven wrong), why > don't they just compile *their* code with -fwrapv?
A lot of security patches to address integer overflow issues use post-overflow checks, unfortunately. Even if GCC optimizes them away, it's unlikely that it'll break applications in an obvious way. (Security-related test cases are typically not publicly available.)
