[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [avr-gcc-list] OT Generic C question

From: Anton Erasmus
Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] OT Generic C question
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 19:07:38 +0200

On 20 Sep 2005 at 9:59, Mike Murphree wrote:

> Alexandru Csete said:
> > Please go and see the link http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/s3.html
> > posted by Russell. It makes it perfectly clear that there is no
> > expected behaviour in this situation. There is even an equivalent
> > example where
> >
> > int i = 3;
> > i = i++;
> >
> > gave the values 3, 4 and 7 - each of them equally correct ;-)
> If writing software for a safety critical system which I occasionally
> do, I expect my compiler not to do "Bad Things"(TM) and it certainly
> violates POLA as well.  Whether or not it is undefined behavior in the
> C standard makes little difference to me...

If you write software for a safety critical system ,then you should NOT use 
code constructs that are undefined. Even if 99.9% of the compilers you use
gice, the result you expect, a compiler may give any result and still be a 100%
conformant compiler. 

  Anton Erasmus-- 
A J Erasmus

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]