> Actually I'd suggest the law analogy illustrates the problem with your approach. "You agree on the principle that I am Innocent until proved Guilty right?" Su

> Actually I'd suggest the law analogy illustrates the problem with your approach. "You agree on the principle that I am Innocent until proved Guilty right?" Sure. "And I haven't been proved guilty, have I, so therefore I'm innocent right?" And that's why we need a trial, "But it makes no sense to try the innocent". Your statement makes no sense. The semantic analysis is the trial. The optimization is the sentencing. The compiler is making a false assumption during trial and then proceeding with sentencing as if the code was guilty when the evidence clearly pointed otherwise. (I'm not about to digress into a random quibble about an analogy so this is my last comment on that.)