Richard Kenner wrote: >> Where there are reasonable positions on both sides, nobody ever >> accurately predicts what the majority of a hugely diverse population >> of language users is going to want, and almost everyone believes >> they are in that majority. > > I agree. That's why I support a middle-of-the-road position where we make > very few "guarantees", but do the best we can anyway to avoid gratuitously > (meaning without being sure we're gaining a lot of optimization) breaking > legacy code.
Yes, I think that you, Danny, Ian, and I are all agreed on that point, and, I think, that disabling the assumption about signed overflow not occurring during VRP (perhaps leaving that available under control of a command-line option, for those users who think it will help their code), is the right thing to try. -- Mark Mitchell CodeSourcery [EMAIL PROTECTED] (650) 331-3385 x713
