Message59696
| Author | loewis |
|---|---|
| Recipients | alexandre.vassalotti, christian.heimes, donmez, gregory.p.smith, gvanrossum, loewis |
| Date | 2008-01-11.08:43:37 |
| SpamBayes Score | 0.10104855 |
| Marked as misclassified | No |
| Message-id | <47872C36.3060309@v.loewis.de> |
| In-reply-to | <1200021990.16.0.977254088313.issue1621@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| Content | |
|---|---|
> FWIW gcc hacker Ian Lance Taylor has a nice article about signed > overflow optimizations in gcc, see http://www.airs.com/blog/archives/120 > . Reading that it might be better to use -fno-strict-overflow instead of > -fwrapv. Please be specific. I read it, and I don't think it's better to use -fno-strict-overflow. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2008-01-11 08:43:38 | loewis | set | spambayes_score: 0.101049 -> 0.10104855 recipients: + loewis, gvanrossum, gregory.p.smith, christian.heimes, alexandre.vassalotti, donmez |
| 2008-01-11 08:43:37 | loewis | link | issue1621 messages |
| 2008-01-11 08:43:37 | loewis | create | |