Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register
Groups > comp.compilers > #3334
| From | gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.compilers |
| Subject | Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C |
| Date | 2023-01-20 10:45 -0800 |
| Organization | Compilers Central |
| Message-ID | <23-01-066@comp.compilers> (permalink) |
| References | (1 earlier) <sympa.1673343321.1624.383@lists.iecc.com> <23-01-031@comp.compilers> <23-01-041@comp.compilers> <23-01-062@comp.compilers> <23-01-063@comp.compilers> |
On Wednesday, January 18, 2023 at 3:55:49 PM UTC-8, David Brown wrote: (snip) > So if you have : > > int x, y; > > if (x + 1 > x) y++; // (a) > if (x == INT_MAX) y = 10; // (b) > From your example above, we can see that the compiler can transform (a) > into "y++;" - there is no need for the conditional. But the compiler > can /also/ transform (b) into ";" - it is allowed to reason that if x > /were/ equal to INT_MAX, statement (a) would be undefined behaviour > (even though it was transformed away) and there is no value for x which > would result in "y = 10" being executed without also executing UB. I am now wondering both how well compilers do this, and how well people do this. Note that the only case where, on all machines I use, the y++ is not executed, is when x==INT_MAX. Now, it would be completely different for: if(x + 2 > x) y++; (a) or if(x == INT_MAX) y--; For many years, C allowed for sign-magnitude and ones' complement representation. Fixed point overflow was, then, at least machine dependent as they overflow differently. Some machines have the ability to enable an interrupt on fixed point overflow, but at least for Fortran and C, it is normally disabled. Now, C has unsigned int which you can use when you need specific overflow behavior (except on some Unisys machines). Fortran does not, and so people expect, and depend, on two's complement overflow. (The Fortran standard allows for any integer radix greater than one, and also for different sign representations. But often enough, people know it is two's complement binary.) As C allows for both UB and system-dependent behavior, and it is hard for people to remember every case of each one, it is unreasonable to me, to assume fixed point overflow is UB. Dereference of pointers that might point to the wrong place, maybe. The reason for the Fortran example above, mentioning short circuit IF statements, was that Fortran programs, at least with IBM compilers, could reliably fetch from element 0 of an array. With static allocation, and data stored after code, there was no chance of element 0 being outside the address space. Yes people shouldn't rely on it, but sometimes they did. Storing outside an array often enough leads to problems, but fetch much less often.
Back to comp.compilers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C "Lucian Popescu" <lucic71@ctrl-c.club> - 2023-01-05 10:05 +0000
RE: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C "Nuno Lopes" <nuno.lopes@tecnico.ulisboa.pt> - 2023-01-05 10:24 +0000
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> - 2023-01-05 18:06 +0000
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> - 2023-01-05 16:22 -0800
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2023-01-06 08:41 +0000
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-06 16:12 +0100
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> - 2023-01-06 10:33 -0800
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> - 2023-01-06 11:39 -0800
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> - 2023-01-07 12:10 +0000
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2023-01-13 20:46 +0000
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-01-09 10:14 +0000
Re: Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C Jon Chesterfield <jonathanchesterfield@gmail.com> - 2023-01-10 10:46 +0000
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2023-01-11 09:34 +0000
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-01-12 05:21 +0000
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-12 12:21 -0800
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2023-01-12 21:50 +0000
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-01-15 04:17 +0000
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-11 14:20 +0100
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> - 2023-01-18 13:14 +0000
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-18 21:14 +0100
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> - 2023-01-18 21:10 -0800
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> - 2023-01-20 10:45 -0800
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-20 13:54 -0800
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> - 2023-01-23 18:50 -0800
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in Fortran "Steven G. Kargl" <sgk@REMOVEtroutmask.apl.washington.edu> - 2023-01-26 21:12 +0000
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in Fortran gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> - 2023-01-26 17:50 -0800
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C "Alexei A. Frounze" <alexfrunews@gmail.com> - 2023-01-19 21:18 -0800
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2023-01-20 20:42 +0000
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2023-01-21 11:54 +0000
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2023-01-22 09:56 +0000
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-01-22 07:04 +0000
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C Martin Ward <martin@gkc.org.uk> - 2023-01-23 17:12 +0000
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-10 17:32 +0100
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> - 2023-01-10 15:57 -0800
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-11 14:40 +0100
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> - 2023-01-11 16:09 -0800
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C dave_thompson_2@comcast.net - 2023-01-28 10:35 -0500
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2023-01-06 07:47 +0000
Re: Undefined Behavior Optimizations in C Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-01-09 09:10 +0000
csiph-web