search for: sequitor

...on" instruction because "undef" isn't good enough. But there is no need to ask what the result of overflow is because "+nsw" is like a "+" inside of an if-statement whose condition precludes overflow, and if it can't overflow then asking about it is a non sequitor. And speculatively hoisting the "+nsw" doesn't cause problems because hoisting a "+nsw" is like taking a "+" outside of the if-statement that guarantees no overflow, it is then simply a plain old un-attributed "+" operation which has no undefined behavio...

...use "undef" isn't good enough. > > But there is no need to ask what the result of overflow is > because "+nsw" is like a "+" inside of an if-statement whose > condition precludes overflow, and if it can't overflow then > asking about it is a non sequitor. > > And speculatively hoisting the "+nsw" doesn't cause problems > because hoisting a "+nsw" is like taking a "+" outside of the > if-statement that guarantees no overflow, it is then simply > a plain old un-attributed "+" operation which...

No, I just think 15 years or so is more than enough time to have addressed the issue. On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 14:05:08 -0700, Dan Kaminsky wrote: > So, this isn't your problem and you don't respect the people's whose > problem it is. > > On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 12:43 PM, Iain Morgan <imorgan at nas.nasa.gov> wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 11:55:18

...t; >> But there is no need to ask what the result of overflow is >> because "+nsw" is like a "+" inside of an if-statement whose >> condition precludes overflow, and if it can't overflow then >> asking about it is a non sequitor. >> >> And speculatively hoisting the "+nsw" doesn't cause problems >> because hoisting a "+nsw" is like taking a "+" outside of the >> if-statement that guarantees no overflow, it is then simply >> a pl...