Hello,
I didn't say it was a stupid question. I said I don't see
much of an issue. Ordinary English words have their ordinary meanings
within the standard, unless ISO or the standard redefine them.
That's all.
Different compilers doing different things may well be a difference
in quality of implementation rather than interpretation. Or
an engineering decision that cost (in execution efficiency) versus
value (of debugging) indicates checking (or not).
The standard defines the standard, implementations do not.
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 11:36:44 -0400, Aleksandar Donev
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
<snip>
> So
>there is obviously differences in interpretation here.
<snip>
--
Cheers!
Dan Nagle
Purple Sage Computing Solutions, Inc.
|