From 2331139394034923092 X-Google-Thread: f78e5,174aa7b34b06a51 X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!news.glorb.com!peer1.news.newnet.co.uk!peer1.news.newnet.co.uk!194.159.246.34.MISMATCH!peer-uk.news.demon.net!kibo.news.demon.net!news.demon.co.uk!demon!stump.algebra.com!devnull From: hyrosen@mail.com (Hyman Rosen) Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Subject: Re: Is this really unspecified behavior? Date: Sat, 24 Dec 2005 14:18:38 GMT Lines: 26 Sender: mail2news@demon.net Approved: fjh@cs.mu.oz.au (Fergus Henderson , moderator of comp.std.c++) Message-ID: References: <1132759176.368850.264850@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1132933832.802917.153350@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1133551647.532929.325730@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> <1133583412.951239.208510@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1133910546.716987.80030@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <0l5ep1ppfhdj5p1pcu7e4na4ub0vjajlq3@4ax.com> <200512201408.jBKE8g64093941@mailbox7.ucsd.edu> <1135116348.175747.219310@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1135179561.238816.222930@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: news.news.demon.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 1135433925 16429 158.152.254.254 (24 Dec 2005 14:18:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 24 Dec 2005 14:18:45 +0000 (UTC) X-Robomod: STUMP, ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov) X-User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Windows/20050923) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at cs.mu.OZ.AU X-Received: (from fjh@localhost) by mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.9/Submit) id jBOEIcQP022589; Sun, 25 Dec 2005 01:18:38 +1100 (EST) X-Path: comp-std-cpp-robomod!not-for-mail X-Delivered-To: std-c++@ucar.edu X-Authentication-Warning: mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU: fjh set sender to devnull@stump.algebra.com using -f X-Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.std.c++:2899 Momchil Velikov wrote: > Yes, it breaks the language by removing means to > specify independence of the order of evaluation. But C++ has no such construct now. Given void f(), g(); please tell me how I can write a program which allows the compiler to call these in an unspecified order? Oh, wait, I know! int call_f() { f(); return 0; } int call_g() { g(); return 0; } call_f() + call_g(); We can even write templates to help! I shall have to go through my existing code looking for such opportunities to assist the compiler. Or maybe not. --- [ 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 ]