Post #2279978
2026-04-15 05:53 UTC
@vathpela@infosec.exchange @karolherbst@chaos.social
I am pointing out that the signed integer overflow has been taken advantage of since gcc 2.95.3 and so has strict aliasing.
My question what semantics of the language has changed that you think should not have since 2000?
Replies (1)
-
@vathpela@infosec.exchange 2026-04-15 06:02
@pinskia@hachyderm.io @karolherbst@chaos.social no, I don't have a problem with that as a fix. I do think (and know this is unpopular) that the compiler has some obligation to keep old code that previously had a deterministic behavior to have a consistent result. I know the compiler has to move forward, but I think it currently fails many use cases (including one important to me) of keeping code that works working. I don't think we should stop the compiler moving forward in those cases, but I do think we should mark it and let the users ask for specific prior behavior. I think not doing so significantly adds a burden to many maintainers, and I can easily quantify that in my case.