awesome, it's not every day you run across a useful, easy optimization missing from all of LLVM, GCC, and Intel CC http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2017-October/118476.html …
If you want sanitizer to be able to trap on overflow, it's not. You'll get false-positive traps with reassociation.
-
-
Canonical example thanks to unsigned void is (0 * 0x10000) * 0x10000.
-
I doubt you can get this false positive to happen with LLVM and UBSan
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.