From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Free'ing extended types
Date: 1996/04/29
Date: 1996-04-29T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <dewar.830797117@schonberg> (raw)
In-Reply-To: DqMH63.Jvw@world.std.com
Bob Duff said
"Robert is correct in general about erroneousness, but in *this* case,
the RM actually says that it's erroneous on some implementations, and
not others."
Yes indeed, it can be implementation dependent whether or not the semantics
leads to erroneous execution in the case where the semantics is itself
deliberately implementation dependent as in this case.
What I was saying was that you can never look to the actual code in
the implementation to determine this, though you could look to annex M.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1996-04-29 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1996-04-28 0:00 Free'ing extended types Jonas Nygren
1996-04-28 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1996-04-29 0:00 ` Laurent Guerby
1996-04-29 0:00 ` Robert A Duff
1996-04-29 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1996-04-29 0:00 ` Jonas Nygren
1996-04-29 0:00 ` Robert A Duff
1996-04-29 0:00 ` Jonas Nygren
1996-04-29 0:00 ` Robert Dewar [this message]
1996-04-29 0:00 ` Robert A Duff
1996-05-20 0:00 ` Type conversion between access types (was: Free'ing extended types) Scott Leschke
1996-05-21 0:00 ` Robert A Duff
1996-05-22 0:00 ` Scott Leschke
1996-05-23 0:00 ` Robert A Duff
1996-05-23 0:00 ` progers
1996-05-24 0:00 ` Scott Leschke
1996-05-24 0:00 ` Robert A Duff
1996-05-21 0:00 ` Dale Stanbrough
1996-05-21 0:00 ` Robert A Duff
1996-04-29 0:00 ` Free'ing extended types Laurent Guerby
1996-04-29 0:00 ` Robert A Duff
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
1996-04-26 0:00 Jonas Nygren
1996-04-26 0:00 ` Laurent Guerby
1996-04-27 0:00 ` Jerry van Dijk
1996-04-28 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1996-04-28 0:00 ` Jonas Nygren
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox