Displaying 2 results from an estimated 2 matches for "5659d353".
Did you mean:
5655da53
2016 May 29
0
problems with objects larger than PTRDIFF_MAX
...>>>
>>> http://trust-in-soft.com/objects-larger-than-ptrdiff_max-bytes/
>>>
>>
> --
> Alexander Cherepanov
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160529/5659d353/attachment.html>
2016 May 29
2
problems with objects larger than PTRDIFF_MAX
On 2016-05-20 19:58, David Majnemer via llvm-dev wrote:
> I've come across this issue before and came to the following conclusion:
> - We are not obligated to support objects that large, C11 5.2.4.1/1 only
> requires that we support objects of size 65535!
Right, the standard doesn't require it. But I guess you don't imply that
it's fine for clang to silently miscompile