Path: ...!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: Baby X is bor nagain
Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2024 11:04:21 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <86zfrbfsd6.fsf@linuxsc.com>
References: <v494f9$von8$1@dont-email.me> <20240617002924.597@kylheku.com> <v4pddb$m5th$1@dont-email.me> <20240618115650.00006e3f@yahoo.com> <v4rv0o$1b7h1$1@dont-email.me> <20240618184026.000046e1@yahoo.com> <v4sd75$1ed31$1@dont-email.me> <877celzx14.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <v4u85k$1t2pu$2@dont-email.me> <v4ucmn$1u14i$1@dont-email.me> <v4v2br$22c0m$1@dont-email.me> <v4v5nu$230rh$2@dont-email.me> <v4vfrn$24rv6$1@dont-email.me> <v50n9s$2fkko$1@dont-email.me> <v50poh$2g4ha$1@dont-email.me> <87iky3svqh.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <874j9nxsdy.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <874j9ns382.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <86h6dlhb34.fsf@linuxsc.com> <8734p3rjno.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <v59bhe$ch8p$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Injection-Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2024 20:04:22 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="0b6502de53f4a38a6a5d9b1aa17823cb";
	logging-data="464194"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/98OjPNz6ix4IKGft3BgN/Y4mJVQVtGC0="
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:2UIiR6btkKr+u9AsEalxcnlEcVM=
	sha1:uujA0nHAlZAuhvNTa0k6VpyEZEo=
Bytes: 1991

James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:

[on the requirements for qsort]

> I certainly would favor improved wording that made this clearer.
> In fact, simply explicitly mandating total ordering rather than
> making a vague comment about consistency would probably be the
> best approach.

Clearly the C standard intends to impose a weaker requirement
than that the comparison function be a total ordering.