From 4269788789704750405
X-Google-Thread: f78e5,174aa7b34b06a51
X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local01.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.speakeasy.net!news.speakeasy.net.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2005 00:01:13 -0600
Return-Path: <devnull@stump.algebra.com>
X-Authentication-Warning: mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU: fjh set sender to devnull@stump.algebra.com using -f
X-Robomod: STUMP, ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov)
Delivered-To: std-c++@ucar.edu
From: "Christopher Dearlove" <chris.dearlove@baesystems.com>
Newsgroups: comp.std.c++
Subject: Re: Is this really unspecified behavior?
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <1135175196.060746.148580@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
References: <1132759176.368850.264850@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
   <H1phf.161529$zb5.99785@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
   <1132933832.802917.153350@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
   <1133551647.532929.325730@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>
   <1133583412.951239.208510@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
   <E1EjGBD-0005T8-00@chx400.switch.ch>
   <1133910546.716987.80030@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
   <E1EjzL6-0006ic-00@chx400.switch.ch>
   <0l5ep1ppfhdj5p1pcu7e4na4ub0vjajlq3@4ax.com>
   <200512201408.jBKE8g64093941@mailbox7.ucsd.edu>
   <1135116348.175747.219310@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>
   <E1Ep3x5-0005JD-00@chx400.switch.ch>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
User-Agent: G2/0.2
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=20.133.0.14;
   posting-account=YRGDDQwAAADQxWPTzNyEM1f9cq4lmlU2
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ucar.edu
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at cs.mu.OZ.AU
Approved: Fergus Henderson <fjh@cs.mu.oz.au>, moderator of comp.std.c++
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at cs.mu.OZ.AU
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 23:51:42 CST
Lines: 15
NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.182.171.162
X-Trace: sv3-nuPwvgf3eHfLY4nftBWtT1AN6BI0TLwUsSKuvFbjb9VBU72ZDVTayiUnKR7AkPPev2gwghaGDayBzTx!yb+qZ1z+wT3NSyba1K4wjCbECuJf49ggovNEYmVfYLGzkDsXUQwl5BFRy+kFNUyCgUhMOdbdkVS+!RqL4cQgzKbaxuujXxodz8AqTlQcD8izHVXwGpJEyRRI=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@speakeasy.net
X-DMCA-Complaints-To: abuse@speakeasy.net
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.32
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.std.c++:2893

Hyman Rosen wrote:
> Fortunately, specifying order of evaluation
> does not involve breaking anything.

Except existing compilers. And hence it would be ten years or more
before we could usefully rely on this even after specification, whilst
in the transition period I suspect there would likely be more resulting
bugs, not fewer. So it wouldn't be, I submit, a painless process.

---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu    ]
[              --- Please see the FAQ before posting. ---               ]
[ FAQ: http://www.jamesd.demon.co.uk/csc/faq.html                       ]



