| ▲ | ozgrakkurt 10 hours ago |
| But the compilers have to optimize the crap code in big tech codebases by 0.5%, it saves a lot of money. Also performance doesn't matter that much and developer time is more important btw, keep using react. |
|
| ▲ | muvlon 9 hours ago | parent [-] |
| It's not even about optimizing some big tech codebase by 0.5%. The progress guarantees in particular are in place s.t. Nvidia can choose a certain implementation strategy in Cuda C++ that has "surprising" consequences for users (one thread getting stuck in an infinite loop that never yields can livelock its entire warp) but still get to claim "full C++ standards compliance". |
| |
| ▲ | JoshTriplett 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | So let it livelock the entire warp when someone writes an infinite loop. Should we start replacing integer division by zero with INT_MAX so that people aren't "surprised" by their program crashing? | | |
| ▲ | muvlon 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | I mean that's what they did, and that's why there's that UB. All I'm saying is that this is the "weird platform behaviors exist and must be legalized by the standard" kind of UB and not the "we want a 0.5% win for benchmaxxing" kind of UB (the standard has plenty of both). | | |
| ▲ | fc417fc802 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | No, they didn't. UB is a cop out and inserting yield is just plain bad. Locking up one or more threads in an implementation defined manner would be the outcome of least surprise (I already know it's going to lock up at least the one thread). | | |
| ▲ | mitxela 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | The standards intended interpretation of UB was always intended to be something like "implementation defined, no documentation required" to allow for implementation weirdness, even unpredictable ones. It was compiler authors who decided do abuse this allowance to do really unintuitive things instead of weird platform weirdness. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | mitxela 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Isn't that the strategy for most of the stuff in C++? It's the common denominator of a wide variety of platforms. That's why numbers didn't have to be two's complement and characters didn't have to be ASCII for ages. |
|
