Subj : Re: Non-strictly-conforming and unspecified versus undefined behavior
To   : comp.programming.threads,comp.std.c
From : David Hopwood
Date : Sun Feb 20 2005 05:14 am

David Schwartz wrote:
>>All of that is beside the point. The claims I am making are:
>>
>>A. C99 imposes requirements for programs that are not strictly conforming.
> 
>     Doesn't matter, [...]

But you don't dispute that this is correct, I assume.

>>B. POSIX imposes requirements for programs that are not Strictly 
>>   Conforming POSIX Applications.
>>
>>Therefore, it is incorrect to say that "Providing no strictly-conforming
>>code can tell the difference, POSIX is silent." Nothing that Doug has said
>>above contradicts this.
> 
>     You are correct. This should read "providing no program that doesn't 
> invoke undefined behavior can tell the difference".

Thankyou. Did that really require a ~20 article subthread?

-- 
David Hopwood <david.nospam.hopwood@blueyonder.co.uk>

.