NetNews Offline 2/NetNews Offline Volume 2.iso/news/comp/lang/c-part2/12514

Internet Message Format | 1996-08-05 | 1.6 KB

Path: mail2news.demon.co.uk!genesis.demon.co.uk
From: Lawrence Kirby <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: sprintf() question
Date: Mon, 01 Apr 96 11:38:48 GMT
Organization: none
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4jhfbn$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: genesis.demon.co.uk
X-Newsreader: Demon Internet Simple News v1.27
X-Mail2News-Path: genesis.demon.co.uk

In article <[e-mail]>
           [e-mail] "Erik Max Francis" writes:

>Ed Hook wrote:
>
>>  The Standard says that this invokes undefined behavior, so don't do it.
>>  Also, you could probably have answered your own question quite simply:
>
>Checking whether a feature is ANSI-compliant is not going to get desired
>results.

It will tell you if a piece of code is guaranteed to give you the
desired results or not.

> For implementation-dependent behavior, sometimes it will do what you
>want.  Sometimes it will do something strange.  And sometimes it will do
>something disastrous.

And the way that you tell that something has implementation-dependent
or undefined behaviour is to check it against the standard.

  And you're not guaranteed that the behavior will be
>consistent from run to run.  (It may work today but crash horribly in some
>curious circumstances tomorrow.)

Without the standard you don't know what you're guaranteed.

--
-----------------------------------------
Lawrence Kirby | [e-mail]
Wilts, England | [e-mail]
-----------------------------------------