The point is that integer overflow practically always indicates a programming error. How a certain languages handles integer overflows is secondary. These overf

The point is that integer overflow practically always indicates a programming error. How a certain languages handles integer overflows is secondary. These overflows shouldn't happen in the first place. Making overflows a well-defined operation actually hides programming errors. With regard to C compilers, there are a few cases where a compiler performs optimizations because it assumes signed integer overflow cannot happen. This is bad but typically, compiled C behaves like the underlying platform which means signed integers wrap around. With GCC, you can enforce this behavior and make signed integer overflow a defined operation with `-fwrapv`. You can also compile your code with UBSan to get runtime checks during testing. UBSan can also check for unsigned integer overflow which is defined behavior in C. So with modern C compilers, the situation is basically the same as with Rust, Zig or other safer languages.