Re: Comment on "undefined" behavior Re: Definition of intervals as subsets of R - the bad news
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 7:39 AM, Ralph Baker Kearfott <rbk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Everything else being equal, we should try to avoid
> undefined behavior. The goal of the standardization process
> is to define the behavior so things are predictable. We should
> also try to avoid multiple alternatives, unless absolutely
> necessary.
I believe I agree with Baker's general statement. We should
aim at minimizing the number of "undefined beahviour"
close to zero. "Undefined behaviour" should be the last resort
when everything else has been tried and failed. It does not help portability,
it does not help reproducibility. It weakens the value of a standard.
-- Gaby