Article View: comp.lang.modula2
Article #2603Re: Report on defect in M2 vs C (Was Modula-2, Modula-3, C or C++)
From: Robert Dewar
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 14:40
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 14:40
14 lines
1380 bytes
1380 bytes
:> Something is better than nothing, as long as you dont get a false sense > of security from it. Im more concerned about boundary behavior, ie what > happens with (2^31)*4/32.. When executed in order, it should really > produce an exception - veriants of C which dont optimize to (2^31)/8 > return 0 and go on their merry way... The simple truth of the matter > is you have to know something about the underlying machine in almost any > language. It is interesting to note that in Ada 95, an expression like (2**31)*4/32 is a static expression and therefore requird to be evaluated exactly without intermediate overflow. This rule is precisely to take care of the "more concerned" of the writer.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<dewar.813335969@schonberg>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!news.mathworks.com!panix!cmcl2!schonberg!dewarReferences:
<Pine.SUN.3.91.951005003000.1000A-100000-100000-100000@lagrange.uwaterloo.ca> <4540ha$hqn@regina.seh.codem.com> <Pine.SUN.3.91.951009165821.27682A-100000@lagrange.uwaterloo.ca>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!news.mathworks.com!panix!cmcl2!schonberg!dewar From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) Newsgroups: comp.lang.modula2,comp.lang.modula3,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Report on defect in M2 vs C (Was Modula-2, Modula-3, C or C++) Date: 10 Oct 1995 10:40:42 -0400 Organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences Message-ID: <dewar.813335969@schonberg> References: <Pine.SUN.3.91.951005003000.1000A-100000-100000-100000@lagrange.uwaterloo.ca> <4540ha$hqn@regina.seh.codem.com> <Pine.SUN.3.91.951009165821.27682A-100000@lagrange.uwaterloo.ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: schonberg.cs.nyu.edu X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 (NOV)