On 2009-03-24, at 22:18, John Cowan wrote: > > Vincent Manis scripsit: > >> This raises an interesting point. Perhaps there are language >> standards >> that have no implementation-defined behavior. I have certainly never >> seen one. > > ES 3.1 is attempting to reach the stage where there is no *explicitly* > undefined behavior. The same is true of Java. There may, of course, > be undefined behavior as a result of overlooked points. For example, > it is not explicitly prescribed by ES 3.1 that evaluating arithmetic > expressions cannot have side effects.
In many cases, the implementation dependencies are rather subtle. For example, most programming language implementations define math routines by calling the corresponding routines in the C library. Of course, one can say that accuracy and error behavior are `unspecified', rather than `implementation-dependent'. -- v _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
