🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4a6sjr$t1j@lyra.csx.cam.ac.uk>, nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (Nick Maclaren) writes:
|>I recommend switching back to Pascal, if that is powerful enough for
|>your purposes :-(

It ain't, and I'm not yet convinced I need to.

|>
|>Not merely does the standard allow strange things to happen between
|>semicolons,

I'm not talking about signals, in case that's what you had in mind.

|> but I can witness that a very high proportion of compilers
|>actually produce such code.  On the other hand, many of the really
|>ghastly examples that I have seen are associated with signal-handling,
|>which is something you can't do at all in standard Pascal (or Fortran,
|>for that matter).

Can you give me an example of the kind of code that compilers generate that
indicates that something funny is going on between sequence points?

|>
|>In extreme cases (like the Cray YMP), not merely do I have to make an
|>unreasonable proportion of my local variables static AND volatile, but
|>I have to compile the most sensitive parts of my code without any
|>optimisation at all.  That particular example does not involve signal
|>handling and shows that, even if the standard mandates a particular
|>instruction ordering, it is unsafe to rely on it.

If a particular buggy compiler refuses to accept identifiers with the prefix 
"_xyxy", does that make it unsave to use such identifiers in general?
--

Chris Volpe				Phone: (518) 387-7766 (Dial Comm 8*833
GE Corporate R&D			Fax:   (518) 387-6560
PO Box 8, Schenectady, NY 12301		Email: volpecr@crd.ge.com