Robert Dewar wrote:
Paul Koning wrote:
That said, it certainly is helpful if the compiler can detect some
undefined actions and warn about them. But that doesn't create a duty
to warn about all of them.
If it were reasonable to require a compiler to generate a warning
for a particular case, the standard would have made it an error.
The whole point in allowing undefined behavior is that in certain
cases, it is too onerous for a compiler to be required to detect
the undefined behavior, so it is not required to do so.
I recall something in the Ada LRM that a conforming
Ada program did not depend on undefined or implementation
dependent behavior. The example I remember being
used to explain it to me was a program depending upon
the precise order of tasks executing. That can obviously
vary based upon interrupts, CPU speed, time slice
quantum and a number of tasking implementation decisions.
When you talk undefined, the program is questionable
at best. I like the Ada LRM because it tries to be very
clean about this in a way that a programmer can understand
and try to do the right thing.
--
Joel Sherrill, Ph.D. Director of Research & Development
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On-Line Applications Research
Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS Huntsville AL 35805
Support Available (256) 722-9985
