Re: Two different Results between C and C++

From	Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c
Subject	Re: Two different Results between C and C++
Date	2020-09-08 18:28 -0700
Organization	None to speak of
Message-ID	<87h7s7kabb.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> (permalink)
References	(6 earlier) <87tuz4gt4c.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <86sgbx7sui.fsf@linuxsc.com> <20200904110249.583@kylheku.com> <86pn6w5lwr.fsf@linuxsc.com> <e85cca8f-08fd-4605-9e5c-89431b86b910o@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:
> On Tuesday, September 8, 2020 at 11:27:37 AM UTC-4, Tim Rentsch wrote:
> ...
>> use Keith Thompson's phrase, and there is a tacit assumption
>> that the programs are well-formed (meaning no syntax errors or
>> constraint violations).
>
> I should have commented on this before. You have frequently applied the
> term "well-formed" to C code, but as far as I can tell, Keith has never
> used the phrase "well-formed" at all in this discussion.

James, the way you snipped Tim's text could imply that he said I had
used the phrase "well-formed".

Restoring some context, Tim wrote:

    I'm not sure you understand the question being discussed.  The
    set of programs under discussion is real-world C programs, to
    use Keith Thompson's phrase, and there is a tacit assumption
    that the programs are well-formed (meaning no syntax errors or
    constraint violations).

The phrase of mine that Tim was referring to was "real-world C
programs", not "well-formed".  I just wanted to be clear on that
(trivial) point.

Getting back to the topic of this thread, Tim also wrote:

    Assuming that condition is met, the question is: Can such
    transformations be effected, with only a small effort in each case,
    for almost all real-world C programs?

(I've omitted some relevant context.  The phrase "such transformations"
refers to transforming a valid C program to a program that is valid C and
valid C++ and has equivalent semantics in both languages.  I may have
missed some nuance.)

I note that Tim has not, unless I've missed something, attempted
to answer that question himself.

In a similarly odd omission, I am not asking him to do so.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Working, but not speaking, for Philips Healthcare
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: Two different Results between C and C++ Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2020-09-04 03:13 -0700
  Re: Two different Results between C and C++ Kaz Kylheku <793-849-0957@kylheku.com> - 2020-09-04 18:44 +0000
    Re: Two different Results between C and C++ David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-09-05 15:57 +0200
    Re: Two different Results between C and C++ Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2020-09-08 08:27 -0700
      Re: Two different Results between C and C++ James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2020-09-08 17:50 -0700
        Re: Two different Results between C and C++ James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2020-09-08 21:07 -0400
        Re: Two different Results between C and C++ Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-09-08 18:28 -0700
          Re: Two different Results between C and C++ James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2020-09-08 22:14 -0400
        Re: Two different Results between C and C++ Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2020-09-10 06:35 -0700
  Re: Two different Results between C and C++ Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-09-04 11:46 -0700
    Re: Two different Results between C and C++ Kaz Kylheku <793-849-0957@kylheku.com> - 2020-09-04 19:07 +0000
    Re: Two different Results between C and C++ Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2020-09-10 04:15 -0700
      Re: Two different Results between C and C++ Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-09-10 12:46 -0700

csiph-web