From -3199488691475758330 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f78e5,edb7b260f2974eab X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public From: fjh@mundook.cs.mu.OZ.AU (Fergus Henderson) Subject: Re: C/C++ object identity (was: C++ briar patch (Was: Object IDs are bad)) Date: 1997/05/30 Message-ID: <5mkddd$3fc@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 244894171 References: <5l27qb$2fm$1@Masala.CC.UH.EDU> <5lbffe$dhb$1@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au> <5lotr8$e7n@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> <5lrc40$5e0@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> <3383ED66.5622@strip_these_words.ix.netcom.com> <5m1upg$olo@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> <5midmt$4t9@skylark.ucr.edu> X-Original-Date: 29 May 1997 17:12:13 GMT Organization: Comp Sci, University of Melbourne X-Auth: PGPMoose V1.1 PGP comp.std.c++ iQBFAgUBM45rRuEDnX0m9pzZAQFlYwGAjZyf8suphc4OP8ThG1wtZQG2R2I6AyKv 115sxBT9OJSIO5q4hvqr0e0AVmEjB6Xb =lCuf Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Originator: fjh@mundook.cs.mu.OZ.AU Tom Payne writes: >In comp.std.c++ Fergus Henderson wrote: >: Hyopthetically assuming that the C standard committee had really >: intended to make the results of `==' on ponters to unrelated objects >: undefined, > >I used to subscribe to that hypothesis, but 6.3.9 (Equality operators) >"Contraints" ... makes no restriction that the referrents of these >pointers be related. OK, the fact that the "Constraints" section doesn't explicitly disallow it means that it is not explicitly undefined. But (one could argue) it is not explicitly defined either, hence it is still undefined behaviour. -- Fergus Henderson | "I have always known that the pursuit WWW: | of excellence is a lethal habit" PGP: finger fjh@128.250.37.3 | -- the last words of T. S. Garp. --- [ 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 ] [ FAQ: http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/faq.html ] [ Policy: http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/policy.html ] [ Comments? mailto:std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu ]