From: Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com>
Subject: Re: Rep specs
Date: 1999/06/02
Date: 1999-06-02T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7j2687$86u$1@nnrp1.deja.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 37542022.789354FD@nospam.lmco.com
In article <37542022.789354FD@nospam.lmco.com>,
Steve Quinlan <steven.quinlan@nospam.lmco.com> wrote:
> Read section 13 carefully. There are lots of vendor weasel
> words in there.
> "Recommended level of support", "an implementation may place
> implementation-defined restrictions on representation items",
> the
> "implementation advice" sections. All this means that
> representation clause
> support can vary significantly from one vendor to another.
That's over-pessimistic. All the sections in chapter 13 under
recommended level of support become REQUIREMENTS for a compiler
implementing the systems programming annex. Clearly if you want
to use rep clauses, you should choose a compiler that supports
this annex (virtually all compilers do), and then, if possible
restrict your use of rep clauses to those that are included
in these sections on recommended level of support.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1999-06-02 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1999-05-31 0:00 Rep specs Eddy Raineri
1999-05-31 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1999-06-01 0:00 ` czgrr
1999-06-03 0:00 ` Marin David Condic
1999-06-01 0:00 ` Steve Quinlan
1999-06-02 0:00 ` Robert Dewar [this message]
1999-06-03 0:00 ` Samuel T. Harris
1999-06-04 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
1996-10-07 0:00 Rep Specs Doug Shipler
1996-10-08 0:00 ` Stephen Leake
1996-10-13 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox