gazelle
5/8/2011 1:14:00 PM
In article <im8rmo$n1s$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> wrote:
....
>> To be fair, "a few moments experimenting with a compiler" is what leads
>> to code like "foo[x] = x++;". While certainly useful, it's not
>> necessarily good for answering "is this 'legal' and/or portable C" types
>> of questions.
>
> Agreed: Experimenting with the compiler cannot provide a positive
>assurance of conformity. However, it *can* provide a fairly reliable
>negative signal. For example,
Not necessarily. He might conclude, correctly in some instances, that his
compiler was faulty (*). That's always a possibility.
(*) Or "non-conforming", which, in the language of this newsgroup, is the
same thing.
--
Just for a change of pace, this sig is *not* an obscure reference to
comp.lang.c...