Why is undefined behavior allowed (as opposed to not compiling/crashing)?

Posted by Roman A. Taycher on Stack Overflow See other posts from Stack Overflow or by Roman A. Taycher
Published on 2010-05-10T11:39:38Z Indexed on 2010/05/10 11:44 UTC
Read the original article Hit count: 181

I understand the reasons for compiler/interpreter language extensions but why is behaviour that has no valid definition allowed to fail silently/do weird things rather then throwing a compiler error? Is it because of the extra difficulty(impossible or simply time consuming) for the compiler to catch them)?

© Stack Overflow or respective owner

Related posts about compiler

Related posts about unspecified