Re: Relation between P1788 and P1788.1
Vincent,
Yes, that is true. Certainly, that would be true of any
standard that is a subset of any other standard. For instance
a USB 3 conforming device (USB is a standard but not an
IEEE standard) might not function in a USB 2 port, but
a USB 2 device should function in a USB 3 port, n'est pas?
Baker
On 12/07/2014 08:10 PM, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
On 2014-12-04 11:35:24 -0600, Ralph Baker Kearfott wrote:
Vincent,
Can you explain?
For instance, a program may call a function specified by 1788 but
not by 1788.1, with incorrect types. Such a program would not be
1788-conforming because of that, but there's nothing that prevents
it from being 1788.1-conforming since this function is not specified
by 1788.1.
Now, a conforming *program* has not been defined anywhere, AFAIK (but
I suppose that this can only be done from a language specification).
--
---------------------------------------------------------------
Ralph Baker Kearfott, rbk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (337) 482-5346 (fax)
(337) 482-5270 (work) (337) 993-1827 (home)
URL: http://interval.louisiana.edu/kearfott.html
Department of Mathematics, University of Louisiana at Lafayette
(Room 217 Maxim D. Doucet Hall, 1403 Johnston Street)
Box 4-1010, Lafayette, LA 70504-1010, USA
---------------------------------------------------------------