Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by IshKebab 41 days ago
They don't really. In fact there are many things that are technically UB but are so common that compilers can't really treat them as UB. E.g. type punning via unions.
2 comments
el_pollo_diablo 41 days ago
Type punning via unions is not UB in C in general, but it is in C++ IIRC.

I write "in general" because, as with other forms of memory reinterpretation (memcpy or copy through a character type), evaluating a trap representation triggers UB.

link
Chaosvex 41 days ago
The short version is that it's fine in C++ as long as you only read the member that was last written to or a char type.
link
1718627440 41 days ago
And a slightly longer version is, that there are three types involved: the type of access, the effective type of the object[0], and the type of the variable. The type of the variable is only for the compiler to emit warnings, as long as the effective type and the type of access are equal, it isn't UB.

[0] the C meaning of an object, not the C++ one

link
IcyWindows 41 days ago
Yeah, undefined behavior just means not defined in the specification.

I would argue that most languages only have one compiler so it doesn't matter what is in the specification.

link