Liste des Groupes | Revenir à c theory |
On 2024-05-17 17:14:01 +0000, olcott said:
...On 5/17/2024 5:53 AM, Mikko wrote:On 2024-05-16 14:50:19 +0000, olcott said:
>On 5/16/2024 5:48 AM, Mikko wrote:On 2024-05-15 15:24:57 +0000, olcott said:
>>>typedef int (*ptr)(); // ptr is pointer to int function>
00 int H(ptr x, ptr x);
01 int D(ptr x)
02 {
03 int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
04 if (Halt_Status)
05 HERE: goto HERE;
06 return Halt_Status;
07 }
08
09 int main()
10 {
11 H(D,D);
12 return 0;
13 }
Can you find any compiler that is liberal enough to accept that?
>
It has been fully operational code under Windows and
Linux for two years.
If your compiler does not reject that program it is not a conforming
C compiler. The semantics according to C standard is that a diagnostic
message must be given. The standard does not specify what happens if
you execute that program anyway.
>
It is not nit picky syntax that is the issue here.
The SEMANTICS OF THE C PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE SPECIFIES
>
No D simulated correctly by any H of every H/D pair specified
by the above template ever reaches its own line 06 and halts.
The standard allows that an program is executed but does not
specify what happens when an invalid program is executed.
Fully operational software that runs under Widows and Linux
proves that the above is true EMPIRICALLY.
No, it does not. As the program is not strictly comforming
and uses a non-standard extension some implementation may
execute it differently or refuse to execute.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.