Subj : Re: Non-strictly-conforming and unspecified versus undefined
To   : comp.programming.threads,comp.std.c
From : Keith Thompson
Date : Fri Feb 18 2005 10:46 pm

"Douglas A. Gwyn" <DAGwyn@null.net> writes:
> David Schwartz wrote:
>>     The standard does not say that output cannot depend upon
>> implementation-defined behavior. If it did, then no useful POSIX strictly
>> conforming program could be written.
>
> The C standard certainly says that about a s.c. program.
> I don't think POSIX uses the term "strictly conforming".

Apparently it does; see Wojtek Lerch's followup elsewhere in this
thread.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center             <*>  <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this.

.