News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Notes on debugging HotSpot's JIT compilation. Parent comment

Re:Notes on debugging HotSpot's JIT compilation by lpapez on Tuesday March 26, 2024 @08:27AM (#39826998)
Yet the compiler writers care only about the language spec, and you can bet that failing to optimize this as dead code would be considered a compiler bug.

This goes not only for Java compiler, but many other languages as well.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Notes on debugging HotSpot's JIT compilation by hardware2win on Tuesday March 26, 2024 @08:43AM (#39827134)
Sometimes compiler engineers try to be too smart and they end up creating a mess :)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8537

>When optimizing code for "dead store removal" the optimizing compiler may remove code necessary for security.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Notes on debugging HotSpot's JIT compilation by guappa on Tuesday March 26, 2024 @10:10AM (#39828038)
I'm going to point out that the bug is marked " RESOLVED INVALID "
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Notes on debugging HotSpot's JIT compilation by hardware2win on Tuesday March 26, 2024 @10:31AM (#39828359)
Political thing, but bug created by removal is real :)
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Notes on debugging HotSpot's JIT compilation by planede on Tuesday March 26, 2024 @11:30AM (#39829150)
The bug is real, but it isn't the compiler's.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Notes on debugging HotSpot's JIT compilation by guappa on Tuesday March 26, 2024 @02:02PM (#39830857)
Well you posted the link… next time at least try to post one that supports your idea instead of the opposite.
[ Parent | on HN ]