>compiler developers do unintuitive but technically legal thing in the name of performance
I still think the relationship between compiler developers and developer-users is toxic as fuck, but as long as we keep comparing compilers by increasingly anal microbenchmarks instead of increasingly anal "correct in practice" tests, I don't see why we continue to find this a surprise.
When we demand better performance, compiler developers are going to exploit undefined behavior as well as other language "loopholes" that don't make intuitive sense. Perhaps a new focus on correctness in practice would change this.
I still think the relationship between compiler developers and developer-users is toxic as fuck, but as long as we keep comparing compilers by increasingly anal microbenchmarks instead of increasingly anal "correct in practice" tests, I don't see why we continue to find this a surprise.
When we demand better performance, compiler developers are going to exploit undefined behavior as well as other language "loopholes" that don't make intuitive sense. Perhaps a new focus on correctness in practice would change this.