3 ms·
Conversely, I'd like to see some actual evidence of some significant amount of UB that you could make defined without losing much optimization ability. Everyon
by umanwizard 8y ago
Conversely, I'd like to see some actual evidence of some significant amount of UB that you could make defined without losing much optimization ability.
Everyone always rails against the bogeyman of asshole compile writers maliciously rewriting your program to eke out 1ms on benchmarks, but nobody every names which clang or llvm optimization pass, specifically, they think should be turned off even in -O2 or -O3.
- vyodaiken 8y agoThat's a false choice. Obviously Linux code is still optimized significantly despite their extensive disabling of UB based "optmizations".
- umanwizard 8y agoOkay, so, specifically, which passes do you think clang/llvm should not run that it's running now in -O3 ?