The article argues that wrapping by default is the wrong choice, and that C and C++ got it right with UB-on-overflow. GP points out that for unsigned integers,

The article argues that wrapping by default is the wrong choice, and that C and C++ got it right with UB-on-overflow. GP points out that for unsigned integers, C and C++ got it wrong, too. The C11 standard agrees that when an integer would overflow, instead it wraps, while carefully avoiding saying that it's overflowing simply to preserve the defined term "Overflow" for the error code. In contexts other than the C11 standard it's fair to say that the integer overflowed, even if the language specifies that it wraps and "can never overflow".