>-- Perhaps the compiler guys could be persuaded to support
> the needed features explicitly, perhaps via a command-line
> option: -std=vanilla
> This should be a no-cost option as things stand today, but
> it helps to prevent nasty surprises in the future.
It looks LLVM has th
> Suggestions:
>
> a) Going forward, I suggest that UB should not be invoked
> unless there is a good solid reason.
Good luck rewriting most of the kernel source.
This discussion is insane!
-Andi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in
the body of a mess
On 05/04/2016 11:35 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> The disagreement here is the priority between these points.
Yes.
As usual, all the extremes are wrong.
Tradeoffs must be made.
Perspective and judgment are required.
> In my very strong opinion, "no undefined behavior" per the C standard
> is way
