https://bugs.exim.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1861
--- Comment #5 from Zoltan Herczeg <hzmester@???> ---
> As I wrote in the commit message, it is not. If you're programming in
> assembler, sure, it is, but in C, you're not programming an x86, but the C
> abstract machine, and the compiler is allowed to assume (and does assume,
> ask the Linux kernel guys) that UB doesn't happen, and optimise accordingly.
Is this described in the C standard?
> Are you talking about SLJIT_MEMCPY? I was jut following SLJIT_MEMMOVE. Why
> should memcpy be different?
I mean I would rather use SLJIT_MEMCPY directly than introducing another
sljit_unaligned_store_s32 macro. Perhaps it would good to remove SLJIT_MEMMOVE
as well, since I don't think I do any overlapping copies in the code. But I
will check it later.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
