Jim Apple has posted comments on this change. Change subject: Add a build flag for the undefined behavior sanitizer, aka "ubsan". ......................................................................
Patch Set 2: > If they're relying on twos-complement we could just cast to > unsigned for the bit-manipulation, right? > > Are any of these overflows legitimate use of signed overflows? > > Assuming not, shouldn't we just fix the code that can lead to > > signed overflows? Otherwise, while the behavior would become > > defined, it's still not correct. > > What is your definition of a legitimate use of a signed overflow? > > Several are intentional and demonstrate an understanding of two's > complement arithmetic. Yes, but let me try to rephrase my last question to Dan: If an Impala user adds 1 to the maximum signed integer value, should they expect that it will overflow to the minimum signed integer value? If so, presumably we should have a test for that. -- To view, visit http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/5082 To unsubscribe, visit http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/settings Gerrit-MessageType: comment Gerrit-Change-Id: I88c7234bd7c5eb7404490a0913d90470c10835e7 Gerrit-PatchSet: 2 Gerrit-Project: Impala-ASF Gerrit-Branch: master Gerrit-Owner: Jim Apple <jbapple-imp...@apache.org> Gerrit-Reviewer: Dan Hecht <dhe...@cloudera.com> Gerrit-Reviewer: Jim Apple <jbapple-imp...@apache.org> Gerrit-Reviewer: Tim Armstrong <tarmstr...@cloudera.com> Gerrit-HasComments: No
