From: ldo@nz.invalid   
      
   On Wed, 7 Jan 2026 20:48:03 -0800, Andrey Tarasevich wrote:   
      
   > When it comes to invalid (or missing, in C++) `return` statements,   
   > GCC tends to adhere to a "punitive" approach in optimized code - it   
   > injects instructions to deliberately cause a crash/segfault in such   
   > cases.   
   >   
   > Clang on the other hand tends to stick to the uniform approach based   
   > on the "UB cannot happen" methodology, i.e. your code sample would   
   > be translated under "p is never null" assumption, and the function   
   > will fold into a simple unconditional `return 0`.   
      
   Which one is more likely to lead to unexpected, hard-to-debug results?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)