3 ms·
What a great idea! https://blog.metaobject.com/2018/07/a-one-word-change-to-c-standard-to-make.html https://blog.metaobject.com/2018/07/a-one-word-change-to-c-
by mpweiher 7y ago
What a great idea!
https://blog.metaobject.com/2018/07/a-one-word-change-to-c-standard-to-make.html https://blog.metaobject.com/2018/07/a-one-word-change-to-c-s...
The comment section also has a lot of the same justifications for the current interpretations that I see here, with fairly thorough debunkings.
Changing that one word is probably not quite enough, at the very least you need to also not make the remaining text a note or also change the status of notes back again.
Then there is the conflict between "imposes no requirements" and "here is the range of permissible actions". These cannot both be true, and the current dogma is to resolve the conflict by pretending the second part dosen't exist (with, admittedly, some justification). But then why on earth is it in the standard at all?
- saagarjha 7y ago"Ranges from" does not necessarily enumerate the only possible choices: https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/148428/using-three-examples-with-range-from https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/148428/using-thr...
- mpweiher 7y agoNever said it did... ?
- saagarjha 7y agoSpecifically, it would allow for more than just the three options you mention there.
- naniwaduni 7y agoIt allows additional options _in between_ those listed. I'm skeptical that such an ill-defined rationale-centric change would hold any purchase with modern compiler-writers (it is certainly arguable what points lie "between" qualitatively-described behaviors), but in general a range does not usually include literally all possibilities.