Re: Computer architects leaving Intel...

Bernd Linsel <bl1-thispartdoesnotbelonghere@gmx.com> schrieb:

The clang/gcc maintainers' POV violates the first part of Postel's Law:
>

Be liberal in what you accept, and conservative in what you send.

>
Life would be a lot easier if they just provided a -WUB option that
warns and explains *any* construct that the compiler may regard as UB.

Maybe a bit more elaborate:

#include <stdio.h>

int main()
{
  int i;
  sscanf("%d", &i);
  return 0;
}

Should this be warned about?

Or what about

void foo(int *a)
{
  *a ++;
}

Two possible cases of undefined behavior here:  a could be an
invalid pointer, and the arithmetic operation could overflow.