[SystemSafety] A small taste of what we're up against

[Martyn Thomas]

"Support destructive testing of software ! " ??   I'd say "Support
programming languages with unambiguous semantics. "

I'd like to see an ALARP argument for software written in C. Does anyone
have one to share?

Martyn


On 24/10/2018 08:13, Olwen Morgan wrote:
>
> Just a quickie:
>
> if, in the code below, you replace:
>
>
>     PrintEvalOrder((a[0]=++i), (a[1]=++i), (a[2]=++i));
>
> with:
>
>
>     PrintEvalOrder((++i), (++i), (++i));
>
> both clang and tcc tell you the order of evaluation is p1, p2, p3
> whereas gcc says it's p3, p3, p3. ... WTF?
>
> Presumably, this is due to over-zealous optimisation,
>
>
> Support destructive testing of software ! 


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de/mailman/private/systemsafety/attachments/20181024/dfc1e803/attachment.sig>