Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<86jziliyws.fsf@linuxsc.com> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!feed.opticnetworks.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: Whaddaya think? Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2024 17:01:07 -0700 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 22 Message-ID: <86jziliyws.fsf@linuxsc.com> References: <666ded36$0$958$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com> <20240616015649.000051a0@yahoo.com> <v4lm16$3s87h$4@dont-email.me> <v4lmso$3sl7n$1@dont-email.me> <v4lr0m$3tbpj$1@dont-email.me> <8734pd4g3s.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <v4ltuj$3trj2$1@dont-email.me> <87ed8w3025.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <868qz4kty7.fsf@linuxsc.com> <v4olko$flpo$3@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Injection-Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2024 02:01:08 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="fa54ab77d267afe6c3d864a61670dc2b"; logging-data="1657039"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18IzzaqO9BUaiKG64LlsYgQrb2t+sCqD2c=" User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:ZjB+uA6yE7a4dQstepdHVMZiXcg= sha1:s3C77tBpwZenkpDQbL/bqMYKu18= Bytes: 2217 James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> writes: > On 17.06.2024 07:40, Tim Rentsch wrote: > >> Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes: >> >>> The worst consequence of undefined behavior is having your code >>> appear to "work". >> >> Personally I think causing a missle launch that started a >> worldwide thermonuclear war would be a worse consequence. >> YMMV. > > The standard doesn't say anything to prohibit such a consequence, but in > real life such an outcome is possible only if your program is executing > in an environment that allows it to send out launch messages to real > missiles. In such a context, a program that was intended to launch a > missile strike, and seemed to do so, but actually failed to do so, would > arguably be worse. If the enemy knows that you are running such > defective software, that enemy might not be deterred from attacking. None of that has any relevance to my comment.