[llvm-dev] x.with.overflow semantics question

John Regehr via llvm-dev llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Sun May 8 13:57:45 PDT 2016

Hi Pete,

 > Or do you mean that the result of an add may not even be defined? In 
that case would reading it be considered UB in the case where the 
overflow bit was set?

Yeah, this is the case I'm worried about: that for example 
sadd.with.overflow(INT_MAX, 1) might be designed to return { poison, 
true } instead of giving a useful result in the first element of the struct.


More information about the llvm-dev mailing list