On 17/01/17 12:11, Mason wrote: > Jeffrey's link to Ian's blog seems to clear some of the confusion. > http://www.airs.com/blog/archives/120 Well, yeah, but clearly that blog is wrong: > There is a clear difference on a processor which does not use > ordinary twos-complement arithmetic: -fwrapv requires > twos-complement overflow, and -fno-strict-overflow does > not. However, no such processor is in common use today. In practice, > I think that the code generated by the two options will always > behave the same. Andrew.
