2 ms·

also UB according to the spec, but LLVM is free to define it. e.g., clang often converts trivial C++ copy constructors to memcpy, which is UB for self-assignmen

also UB according to the spec, but LLVM is free to define it. e.g., clang often converts trivial C++ copy constructors to memcpy, which is UB for self-assignment, but I assume that's fine because the C++ front-end only targets LLVM, and LLVM presumably defines the behaviour to do what you'd expect.

whytevuhuni 2y ago
Where I work, it is quite normal to link together C code compiled with GCC and Rust code compiled with LLVM, due to how the build system is set up. As far as I know that disables LTO, but the build system is so complex, and the C code so large, that nobody bothers switching the C side to Clang/LLVM as well.