lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2015 15:40:19 +0000 From: Peter Gutmann <pgut001@...auckland.ac.nz> To: "discussions@...sword-hashing.net" <discussions@...sword-hashing.net> Subject: RE: [PHC] Specification of a modular crypt format (2) I wrote: >Maybe I should just tell everyone to use icc, which doesn't seem to have >these problems (and generally produces better code than gcc to boot). Or >Visual Studio, for which I still need to check what it does when I get to a >Windows box with it installed. So without the check for > 0: -- Snip -- [F:\Work]Test64.exe -2147483556 [F:\Work] -- Snip -- with the check for > 0: -- Snip -- [F:\Work]Test64.exe [F:\Work] -- Snip -- That's built with /O2, maximise speed. So while the Gnu folks are still accommodating one's-complement CDC 6600's from 1965 (not sure if the 7600 was one's or two's-complement, but the later Cybers and Cray-1 weren't any more), Microsoft have realised that INT_MAX + 100 = -ve on any known architecture. It is somewhat disturbing to see that LLVM is following the Gnu braindamage though... Peter.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists