> Wrong. Reference:
>
> http://www.phy.duke.edu/~rgb/General/c_book/c_book/chapter8/sequen
> ce_points.html
>
> Cheers,
> Dick Johnson
That discussion is wrong. The form of the argument is simply invalid.
Just because an optimization could break things in some cases doesn?t mean
the compiler can?t ever make the optimization. It just can?t make the
optimization in the case that breaks things. And by ?things? I mean things
that are defined in the standard that would be broken, not things outside of
it.
DS
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |