6 ms·

Yeah, they form a "cluster" of documents: https://www.rfc-editor.org/cluster_info.php?cid=C430 https://www.rfc-editor.org/cluster_info.php?cid=C430, so that the

Yeah, they form a "cluster" of documents: https://www.rfc-editor.org/cluster_info.php?cid=C430 https://www.rfc-editor.org/cluster_info.php?cid=C430, so that the earlier-numbered RFCs can reference later ones. For instance, rfc9000 normatively refers to rfc9001 and rfc9002.

infogulch 5y ago
Curious, why isn't it numbered the other way? My programming brain is telling me that if you're reading rfc9000 you can't reference rfc9001 because it hasn't been initialized yet. :D
- anyfoo 5y ago
  It's in a lot of ways more about not being defined (but possibly declared) yet, rather than initialized. You'd be super sad if you could not reference a function defined later in a source file. Yeah, I'm absolutely great at parties!
  - infogulch 5y ago
    Ok, that explanation works for me. And if there was ever an appropriate time to be pedantic it would be in a discussion on RFCs. :)
  - capableweb 5y ago
    > You'd be super sad if you could not reference a function defined later in a source file. Would you? Most of the environments I'm in requires you to define the thing before you can use it, I'm not that sad about that. In fact, that seems to make a lot more sense than that you can define something after you use it, I'd expect that to lead to a compiler/interpreter error.
    - jopsen 5y ago
      So no recursion?
      - capableweb 5y ago
        Depends on the compiler/interpreter. Function body could be parsed/evaled after the initial function definition.
      - salawat 5y ago
        You totally can. Remember, it's all about tokenizing. You're associating chunks of machine code to tokens that tell the machine where to go to get the actual definition, or where to plop the machine code if statically linking. Nobody said that RFC numbering implied any sort of temporal order. You are the Linker. Be the Linker.
    - anyfoo 5y ago
      What environments are those?
      - dzamo_norton 5y ago
        E.g. Python
- ucarion 5y ago
  Perhaps I should clarify: rfc9001 normatively refers to rfc9000 (and vice versa). There are cyclical references between RFCs, so there isn't any topological ordering. It works out because RFCs convey ideas, not code. The authors and editors take care to make sure the cyclical dependencies don't imply circular definitions or other incoherences.
  - dcow 5y ago
    It works in code too. It’s the difference between declaration and initialization. Very commonly existence of a symbol is declared in a header so that it can be referenced only later does the real implementation get linked in.

infogulch 5y ago

Curious, why isn't it numbered the other way? My programming brain is telling me that if you're reading rfc9000 you can't reference rfc9001 because it hasn't been initialized yet. :D

anyfoo 5y ago
It's in a lot of ways more about not being defined (but possibly declared) yet, rather than initialized. You'd be super sad if you could not reference a function defined later in a source file. Yeah, I'm absolutely great at parties!
- infogulch 5y ago
  Ok, that explanation works for me. And if there was ever an appropriate time to be pedantic it would be in a discussion on RFCs. :)
- capableweb 5y ago
  > You'd be super sad if you could not reference a function defined later in a source file. Would you? Most of the environments I'm in requires you to define the thing before you can use it, I'm not that sad about that. In fact, that seems to make a lot more sense than that you can define something after you use it, I'd expect that to lead to a compiler/interpreter error.
  - jopsen 5y ago
    So no recursion?
    - capableweb 5y ago
      Depends on the compiler/interpreter. Function body could be parsed/evaled after the initial function definition.
    - salawat 5y ago
      You totally can. Remember, it's all about tokenizing. You're associating chunks of machine code to tokens that tell the machine where to go to get the actual definition, or where to plop the machine code if statically linking. Nobody said that RFC numbering implied any sort of temporal order. You are the Linker. Be the Linker.
  - anyfoo 5y ago
    What environments are those?
    - dzamo_norton 5y ago
      E.g. Python
ucarion 5y ago
Perhaps I should clarify: rfc9001 normatively refers to rfc9000 (and vice versa). There are cyclical references between RFCs, so there isn't any topological ordering. It works out because RFCs convey ideas, not code. The authors and editors take care to make sure the cyclical dependencies don't imply circular definitions or other incoherences.
- dcow 5y ago
  It works in code too. It’s the difference between declaration and initialization. Very commonly existence of a symbol is declared in a header so that it can be referenced only later does the real implementation get linked in.