2015.11.22 23:28:13 (668556619006009344) from Daniel J. Bernstein, replying to "Aris Adamantiadis ☠ (@aris_ada)" (668553878221230081):
@aris_ada This isn't about me. The last time I saw gcc breaking my code was an outright gcc bug many years ago (strcmp vs memcmp for x?s:t).
2015.11.22 23:31:27 (668557433057517568) from Daniel J. Bernstein:
@aris_ada But the bigger picture is gcc "upgrades" producing system failures, security problems, unreadable workarounds. Huge waste of time.
2015.11.22 23:35:39 (668558488105299968) from Daniel J. Bernstein:
@aris_ada The C lawyers try to blame the victims, but the C "standard" is a compiler writer's delusion, violated by _most_ deployed C code.
2015.11.22 21:35:47 (668528324029886464) from Daniel J. Bernstein:
Old gcc upgrade: Bug fixes, some speed, some intrinsics. New gcc upgrade: I AM THE LORD THY GCC AND I WILL BREAK YOUR SYSTEM. FEAR MY WRATH.
2015.11.22 22:00:24 (668534516185751553) from Daniel J. Bernstein:
Lawyer for gcc developer doesn't understand when to quit: "By shooting drivers who speed, my client is helping society learn not to speed!"
2015.11.22 23:07:17 (668551347709591552) from Daniel J. Bernstein:
C laywers: "We wrote a STANDARD saying it's okay for us to shoot drivers who speed!" Is it really so hard to understand that you screwed up?
2015.11.22 23:17:20 (668553878221230081) from "Aris Adamantiadis ☠ (@aris_ada)":
@hashbreaker When gcc breaks my broken code, I just fix it and don't whine everywhere on how GCC devs are stupid. Takes 5 minutes.