Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Can you please verify that the analysis of these C functions is
 correct?
Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2024 16:15:15 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <v57bcj$onl4$13@i2pn2.org>
References: <v4obkj$f9p5$2@dont-email.me>
 <v4pg5p$morv$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org>
 <v54s1p$3boc5$1@dont-email.me> <v5684p$3n50u$1@dont-email.me>
 <v56gs1$3olbi$3@dont-email.me> <v56lar$onl4$7@i2pn2.org>
 <v56uij$3rako$1@dont-email.me>
 <v573d1$3s8q3$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org>
 <v5780h$3t1bd$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2024 20:15:15 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="810660"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
In-Reply-To: <v5780h$3t1bd$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 1960
Lines: 21

On 6/22/24 3:17 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> On 6/22/2024 10:58 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>> Am 22.06.2024 um 18:36 schrieb olcott:
>>
>>> It seems pretty stupid to allow gaps in the semantics of C++ 
>>> programs. Simply specify that the order of evaluation is left to 
>>> right unless:
>>> (a) Otherwise specified such as operator precedence rules.
>>> (b) Derives the same result as left to right ordering.
>>
>> Most UB is there to allow optimizations, also in this case.
>> I've got no problem with that.
>>
>>
> 
> Humm. Sounds reasonable. UB is there to be defined by a non-conforming 
> compiler? ;^)

Doesn't need to be Non-Conforming to define the behavior of Undefined 
Behavior!