hamcocar

3 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by hamcocar 1y ago

   Hmmm. How is your comment consistent with some C compilers enabling users to disable TBAA/strict aliasing? Like the Linux kernel does. Do those codebases fit "compile to a very surprising series of instructions,"?
2. 2.▲
   by hamcocar 1y ago

   I am very sorry, but your arguments here are terrible. Unless casting or type punning through unions are used, the type system should help a lot in terms of avoiding using pointers to types that are not compatible in C. And then special car
3. 3.▲
   by hamcocar 1y ago

   >Yeah, concurrency bugs that only occur in very specific situations are hard to track down with a pure testing tool. It would have been better to have prevented it in the first place, and it is inconsistent with "fearless concurrenc
4. 4.▲
   by hamcocar 1y ago

   I think that way of describing it is really weird. In C, you do not use any special keywords to opt into or opt out of TBAA, instead it is the rule by default that one must follow. I do not consider that 'opting out'. One can disa
5. 5.▲
   by hamcocar 1y ago

   I am very sorry, but you do not address that TBAA, like C has by default, generally is easier than just no aliasing, like what Rust has for mutable references. This is a major difference. C code can opt into a similar kind of aliasing, name