[geofft]

I mean, yes, I'm sympathetic to the argument that most people should use a variant of C that isn't actually C and is much better about undefined behavior (not just integer overflow but other things too). https://blog.regehr.org/archives/1180 has some thoughts along these lines.

I'm not sure that pybind11 wants to have its docs using a nonstandard variant of C, though, for lots of reasons, including that I expect the major use case of pybind11 is binding to existing C or C++ projects which are generally written in standard C or C++. (But not always! Postgres, for instance, is written in a variant of C with -fwrapv - not even -ftrapv, but a definition of signed overflow - instead of standard C.)

[anarazel]

> Postgres, for instance, is written in a variant of C with -fwrapv - not even -ftrapv, but a definition of signed overflow - instead of standard C.

To my knowledge that's solely because historically there's been signed integer overflow checks that relied on signed overflow semantics, not because there's otherwise use of overflows. At some point we didn't have a nice, portable and fast way to do overflow checks and so -fwrapv was added... I'd like to revisit that.