On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 9:46 PM, Steve D'Aprano <steve+pyt...@pearwood.info> wrote: > >> And yes, Steve, this is a challenge to you: if you think C's undefined >> behaviour is an abomination that should not be allowed to exist, > > CPython doesn't have to define the behaviour here. In *that* sense, the > ordinary, regular sense, it is undefined. The implication of that is that > whatever happens will happen according to some deterministic but > unpredictable (to you, the developer, at least) chain of cause and effect > that depends on the implementation. Probably something bad. > > That's fine. The Python language does not have to define the behaviour of > programs which abuse ctypes like that. If you do so, then whatever happens > will happen. > > That's not how the C standard defines "undefined behaviour", or the > implication of such.
Can you explain to me how it's different? Either way, the implementation is allowed to do what it likes, because you shouldn't be doing that. ChrisA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
