alt Hacker NewsWell you leave the C++ realm (execution model), as you should with UB and it depends on implementation. The implementation of the compiler was such that the two functions are placed after each other in the machine code; and if the first function doesn't return, then you continue executing into the code for the next function.
Replies
raverbashing • yesterday at 3:58 PM
This makes no sense to me
If I think about asm:
function1:
(do stuff)
jp function1
ret
(other stuff)
ret
call function1
call function2
Oh yeah and TFA also goes with:
> The funny bit is that C got this right.(...) but C included one more rule: loops whose controlling expression is a constant expression may not be assumed to terminate.
Well, duh! A broken clock is right twice a day it seems
➕ show 2 replies
But the compiler assumes the function will make forward progress. If the function does that, it will return, so why doesn’t the compiler emit a function epilogue?