Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #82669
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c++ |
| Subject | Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? |
| Date | 2021-12-17 01:28 +0000 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <87r1acrpd7.fsf@bsb.me.uk> (permalink) |
| References | (1 earlier) <sp61ti$phb$1@dont-email.me> <86czm05exm.fsf@linuxsc.com> <sp9kq1$iua$1@dont-email.me> <865yro4kub.fsf@linuxsc.com> <20211217010755.f1f69829e33365c39389e163@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk> |
Chris Vine <chris@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk> writes:
> On Thu, 16 Dec 2021 07:42:52 -0800
> Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> wrote:
>> Yes, I noticed that before. I didn't comment on it because, one,
>> it strikes me as incidental to the main question, and two, if we
>> change the example just slightly
>>
>> void t() {
>> volatile int a = 0;
>> ++a;
>> t();
>> };
>>
>> int main()
>> {
>> t();
>> }
>>
>> then the program cannot be optimized into nothingness, so we
>> still have the question of how an implementation is obliged to
>> treat this program. And I think the answer is the same, that
>> implementations are obliged to try to carry it out faithfully but
>> are allowed to fail when they run out of memory.
>
> Isn't overflow in signed integers still undefined behavior? If so
> implementations can do whatever they want should they implement tail
> call optimization and so overflow on the integer.
Optimising that tail call won't cause integer overflow. Optimisations
are obliged to preserve semantics!
--
Ben.
Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-12-12 00:42 -0800
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-12-12 09:52 +0100
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? red floyd <no.spam.here@its.invalid> - 2021-12-12 12:59 -0800
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-12-13 01:51 +0200
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-12-13 05:48 +0000
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Bo Persson <bo@bo-persson.se> - 2021-12-13 10:44 +0100
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-12-13 04:44 -0800
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-12-13 07:47 -0500
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-12-14 08:32 +0100
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-12-14 07:49 -0500
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-12-14 14:23 +0000
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach@gmail.com> - 2021-12-14 16:16 +0100
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-12-13 12:13 -0500
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-12-13 12:05 -0800
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? "james...@alumni.caltech.edu" <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-12-13 17:11 -0800
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? "james...@alumni.caltech.edu" <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-12-13 19:00 -0800
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-12-13 23:03 -0800
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-12-14 08:33 +0100
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-12-14 09:13 +0100
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-12-14 10:09 +0000
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-12-14 16:14 +0000
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-12-14 15:23 -0800
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-12-14 16:10 +0000
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-12-14 17:38 +0100
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-12-14 17:09 +0000
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-12-14 18:39 +0100
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-12-14 11:01 -0800
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-12-14 10:52 -0800
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-12-14 20:15 +0100
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-12-14 07:59 -0500
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach@gmail.com> - 2021-12-14 16:19 +0100
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-12-14 11:33 -0500
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-12-13 17:23 +0100
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2021-12-15 23:27 +0000
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-12-16 08:37 +0100
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2021-12-13 14:16 -0800
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-12-13 15:07 -0800
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2021-12-16 05:53 -0800
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-12-16 08:34 -0800
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-12-16 12:17 -0800
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-12-16 13:38 -0800
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-12-16 14:15 -0800
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2021-12-16 20:10 -0800
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-12-16 14:14 -0800
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2021-12-16 20:20 -0800
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-12-17 08:46 -0800
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-12-14 10:32 +0200
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2021-12-16 07:42 -0800
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Chris Vine <chris@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk> - 2021-12-17 01:07 +0000
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-12-17 01:28 +0000
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2021-12-16 19:54 -0800
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Chris Vine <chris@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk> - 2021-12-17 10:06 +0000
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-12-13 17:08 +0100
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2021-12-13 13:50 -0800
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-12-14 16:32 +0100
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2021-12-13 13:13 -0800
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-12-13 15:55 -0800
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-12-13 15:58 -0800
Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-12-14 01:41 -0800
csiph-web