Re: A query about the conformance questionnaire
On 4 Mar 2015, at 14:31, Vincent Lefevre <vincent@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 2015-03-04 08:46:54 +0000, John Pryce wrote:
>> I raised an I/O point with Christian, below. In the text on Input should we:
>>
>> - Say the rule for "snipping" a stream is language-defined (which I guess
>> is the usual case, rather than being implementation-defined?) and shall
>> be documented by the implementation?
>> - Say the rule is implementation-defined, and shall be documented?
>> - Specify such a rule, e.g. by saying it shall conform to what some
>> popular language does by default?
>> - Say nothing about this rule, as at present?
>
> P1788 only defines conversion from/to *strings*, not streams. Any
> extension to streams is out of scope of P1788 and is typically
> language- or implementation-defined, which is basically what 13.1
> says.
You are quite right. In fact my query that I made a note of had already been resolved long since. I should have referred to 13.1. Sorry to waste your time.
John P