News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Towards fearless SIMD, 7 years later by grandempire on Sunday March 30, 2025 @07:37PM (#43528939)
That’s not true.

A conforming implementation may chose to melt your computer - and you can choose to not use that implementation. But clang and gcc will never melt your Linux.

Once again, a real life example where that is relevant is an embedded device with no memory protection. If you overwrite a buffer you can overwrite the OS code - breaking your computer and requiring you to flash the memory.

It seems there is a lot of misguided accusations going around about who misunderstands UB.

Re:Towards fearless SIMD, 7 years later by eru on Sunday March 30, 2025 @11:47PM (#43530734)
> But clang and gcc will never melt your Linux.

If you use gcc or clang to compile your kernel, they will happily melt your Linux.

Re:Towards fearless SIMD, 7 years later by grandempire on Monday March 31, 2025 @12:38AM (#43531112)
If you're referring to what might happen when you overwrite a buffer in privileged kernel code, yes - but that is true regardless of clang, gcc, or what the C standard says about UB.