| 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: Fri, 09 Oct 2015 03:37:51 +0300 From: Alexander Cherepanov <ch3root@...nwall.com> To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net Subject: Re: [PHC] Specification of a modular crypt format (2) On 2015-10-08 18:40, Peter Gutmann wrote: > 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. Did they already implemented C99? > 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. BTW, according to [1, p.4], they optimize "∗p; if (!p)" starting with /O1. I guess MSVC would not be very good for compiling Linux kernel:-) [1] https://pdos.csail.mit.edu/papers/stack:sosp13.pdf > 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... I guess you will enjoy reading what MS guys think: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/oldnewthing/archive/2014/06/27/10537746.aspx :-) -- Alexander Cherepanov
Powered by blists - more mailing lists