Roman Belenov wrote:

> SC> But that expectation is not justified. "Undefined behavior" means
> SC> the standard places NO requirements on the implementation. Any
> SC> result, including "-1", "42", a refusal to compile, or a run-time
>                                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> SC> abort, is allowed.
>
> IMHO  this  particular  behaviour  is  not standard - the code must be
> compiled, even though the resulting binary may destroy the Earth.

You are basically right, but the whole thing (ill-formed
vs well-formed vs shall vs should vs no diagnostic, undefined
vs unspecified, text vs example vs notes vs foonotes vs text
``noting'' something, ...) is a mess.

There are actually two very different kinds of undefined behaviour:
- compile time; ex. ODR
- run time; ex. 1./0

Only the first kind may halt the compilation. It is often
(not always !) called ``ill-formed''. ``shall'' is even
more funny. I don't even want to consider ``should'' here.

Common sens may help. It seems that you have it.

--

Valentin Bonnard


[ 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://reality.sgi.com/austern_mti/std-c++/faq.html              ]