------- Comment #16 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-02-13 15:49 ------- (In reply to comment #15) > (In reply to comment #14) > > If I understand correctly, in order to implement the POSIX behavior for C++, > > assuming we want it, the Standard should be clarified to explain that > > values <= > > 0 or CHAR_MAX are different in that do no admit repetitions, thus saying > > explicitly that such group is effectively the last, arbitrarily long, one. > > Yes, I meen exactly this. > Also, current implementation follows this strategy - according to the tests, > and according to it's source code.
Yes, I know that ;) And I also know that implementing the exact behaviour you want would be trivial and would bring consistency between signed and unsigned char platforms. Probably we want to implement it anyway in v3, but that doesn't mean by itself that it's obviously the only meaningful interpretation of the standard if so many other implementations differ, as pointed out by Martin. Thus let's be clear about that with Martin and probably at the same time also take actions to open a DR for C++0x. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39168
