Path: ...!news.nobody.at!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Computer architects leaving Intel...
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2024 15:46:03 +0300
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <20240915154603.0000272f@yahoo.com>
References: <vaqgtl$3526$1@dont-email.me>
	<memo.20240830090549.19028u@jgd.cix.co.uk>
	<2024Aug30.161204@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>
	<86r09ulqyp.fsf@linuxsc.com>
	<2024Sep8.173639@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>
	<p1cvdjpqjg65e6e3rtt4ua6hgm79cdfm2n@4ax.com>
	<2024Sep10.101932@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>
	<ygn8qvztf16.fsf@y.z>
	<2024Sep11.123824@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>
	<vbsoro$3ol1a$1@dont-email.me>
	<867cbhgozo.fsf@linuxsc.com>
	<20240912142948.00002757@yahoo.com>
	<865xqzg63u.fsf@linuxsc.com>
	<20240913144411.00005866@yahoo.com>
	<vc2ber$120mf$1@dont-email.me>
	<20240914215922.000033d1@yahoo.com>
	<vc4qqv$1lgpq$1@dont-email.me>
	<20240915001939.00003be0@yahoo.com>
	<vc64gr$22g95$1@dont-email.me>
	<20240915125006.00006e78@yahoo.com>
	<vc6kg8$25pl6$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2024 14:45:39 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="b1d11931d9aad568cedfe64b3767d71c";
	logging-data="2177741"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+rG4DOT8Ykt8JkRc1HSzJnpY8L8mZ+x8E="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:+mp/WPgUZBupm4DyQObejU16Jio=
X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 3.19.1 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-w64-mingw32)
Bytes: 2591

On Sun, 15 Sep 2024 12:38:32 -0000 (UTC)
Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote:

> On 2024-09-15, Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> > You seem to think that C should be as optimizable and as full of
> > UBs as Fortran.  
> 
> The only place where "undefined behavior" is mentioned in the Fortran
> standards is with reference to C.
>

The rest of the time they write "program shouldn't" or "when xyz
the program is ill-formed" or something like that. But the meaning is
exactly the same as UB in C.

> > Many compiler authors agree with you. 
> > I have different idea.  
> 
> You don't appear to believe in specifications.
> 
> >iIMHO, your party exploits the letter of C
> > standard in violation to its spirit.  
> 
> If you meet the spirit of the C standard, say hello to him for me.

If I meet him, I'd try drink him.