Hi,
>>"Herbert" == Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Herbert> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Definitions of terms
>> o Undefined Behaviour -- behaviour, upon the use of a nonportable
>> or erroneous program construct, of erroneous data, or of
>> inderminately valued objects, for which the standard imposes no
>> requirements. Permissible undefined behaviour ranges from ignoring
>> the situation completely with unpredictable results, to behaving
>> during translation or program execution in a documented manner
>> charecteristic of the environment (with or without the issuance of
>> a diagnostic message), to terminating a translation or execution
>> (with the issuance of a diagnostic
>> message).
>> ______________________________________________________________________
>> Please show why my statement is incorrect wrt to the above
>> statement from the C standard. I said: "Corupting memory is not
>> acceptable behaviour! (Unless you document this)". The standard
>> says "permissible undefined behaviour ..."
Herbert> It also says that the standard imposes no requirements.
Look at the whole sentence, please. There are indeed no
requirements for the program to behave in any fashion; as long as the
behavioue is documented (and is characteristic of the environment --
monkeys flying out of the users nose is out); if it is not
documented, you can ignore the construct, or terminate translation or
execution (issueing a diagnostic is required then).
I know fashionable, but incorrect, comments on comp.lang.c
would have it otherwise.
manoj
--
"I can't face the world in the morning. I must have coffee before I
can speak." Joseph Cotton in Shadow of a Doubt
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
