Andrea Ferro wrote:
>
> "Albrecht Fritzsche" <albrecht.fritzsche@alfabet.de> wrote
> > in 1.9 Program Execution, there is the following statement (/4)
> >
> >  "Certain other operations are described in this International
> >   Standard as undefined (for example, the effect of dereferencing
> >   the null pointer)."
> >
> > Could someone please tell me, where this description actually is?
> >
>
> You answered yourself!

I beg your pardon if my understanding of English is that wrong, but
while reading "Certain ... operations are described in this
International Standard.." I would expect a statement with that very
description, but not only a simple "for example" clause.

If you are right, wouldn't that imply that the facts of this Standard
are not only in the statements but also in the examples, which IMHO
should only illustrate/clearify stated facts?

Am I that wrong?

Ali
--
Albrecht Fritzsche, Software Developer
alfabet meta-modeling AG,
leibnizstr. 53, 10629 berlin, germany
http://www.alfabet.de

---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu    ]
[              --- Please see the FAQ before posting. ---               ]
[ FAQ: http://www.research.att.com/~austern/csc/faq.html                ]

"Albrecht Fritzsche" <albrecht.fritzsche@alfabet.de> wrote in message
news:3AAF3EC3.B9A42129@alfabet.de...
> Andrea Ferro wrote:
> >
> > "Albrecht Fritzsche" <albrecht.fritzsche@alfabet.de> wrote
> > > in 1.9 Program Execution, there is the following statement (/4)
> > >
> > >  "Certain other operations are described in this International
> > >   Standard as undefined (for example, the effect of dereferencing
> > >   the null pointer)."
> > >
> > > Could someone please tell me, where this description actually is?
> > >
> >
> > You answered yourself!
>
> I beg your pardon if my understanding of English is that wrong, but
> while reading "Certain ... operations are described in this
> International Standard.." I would expect a statement with that very
> description, but not only a simple "for example" clause.
>
> If you are right, wouldn't that imply that the facts of this Standard
> are not only in the statements but also in the examples, which IMHO
> should only illustrate/clearify stated facts?
>
> Am I that wrong?

No. Sorry. Eventually it was *my* understanding of English at fault here. It
looked to me like you were asking where those words were. But I see in the other
posts that the problem is over since William made more guesses and nailed your
question down.

Andrea Ferro

---------
Brainbench C++ Master. Scored higher than 97% of previous takers
Scores: Overall 4.46, Conceptual 5.0, Problem-Solving 5.0
More info http://www.brainbench.com/transcript.jsp?pid=2522556



---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu    ]
[              --- Please see the FAQ before posting. ---               ]
[ FAQ: http://www.research.att.com/~austern/csc/faq.html                ]