From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Addressing functions
Date: 16 Dec 1994 11:56:47 -0500
Date: 1994-12-16T11:56:47-05:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3csgsf$nhk@gnat.cs.nyu.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: EACHUS.94Dec13101448@spectre.mitre.org
Robert Eachus points out the same possible solution (using an address
clause) that I did, but he is too optimistic about its chance of success.
The effect of this sequence of code, or even its legality, cannot be
determined from the RM. It works on some compilers but not on others.
That you expect it might work is based on knowledge of implementation
models. There are many legitimate reasons for a compiler to reject the
program as illegal, and also many legitimate reasons for a compiler
to accept the program and then do the wrong thing.
At ome point CIFO included a requirement that this approach work, but
CIFO is not a standard, and so you can't count on this.
Ada/95 solves this problem directly!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1994-12-16 16:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1994-12-13 1:36 Addressing functions Bill Buckley
1994-12-13 10:14 ` Robert I. Eachus
1994-12-14 13:59 ` Theodore E. Dennison
1994-12-16 14:18 ` Arthur Evans Jr
1994-12-17 17:27 ` Robert Dewar
1994-12-17 17:32 ` Robert Dewar
1994-12-18 6:44 ` Bill Buckley
1994-12-16 16:56 ` Robert Dewar [this message]
1994-12-13 19:04 ` Bob Duff
1994-12-14 1:48 ` Michael Feldman
1994-12-16 14:53 ` Robert Dewar
1994-12-17 7:23 ` Addressing functions (long) Michael M. Bishop
1994-12-18 6:53 ` Bill Buckley
1994-12-14 12:33 ` Addressing functions Mitch Gart
1994-12-15 16:26 ` Erich A. Pfeiffer
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox