Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise)

From	Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c
Subject	Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise)
Date	2016-10-08 11:45 +0100
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<87eg3rxgpa.fsf@bsb.me.uk> (permalink)
References	(1 earlier) <dbc43ef8-1bf7-4a6d-ad00-7a24a4948ca5@googlegroups.com> <eefcce2f-e480-4666-b2cf-b12ac68ad4eb@googlegroups.com> <nt9ha5$q32$1@jstuckle.eternal-september.org> <72742190-1138-4ed9-b3af-9065a5036220@googlegroups.com> <ntagc3$7sc$1@jstuckle.eternal-september.org>

Show all headers | View raw

Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> writes:

> On 10/8/2016 4:02 AM, supercat@casperkitty.com wrote:
>> On Friday, October 7, 2016 at 8:15:09 PM UTC-5, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>> On 10/7/2016 7:17 PM, supercat wrote:
>>>> Since it's possible for an implementation to be conforming and yet
>>>> incapable of running any useful programs, and since limited platforms
>>>> may be better served by a compiler that deviates from the Standard than
>>>> one which adheres to it perfectly, I don't see rigid standards conformance
>>>> as being particularly valuable in and of itself.
>>>
>>> Your fault is in thinking it is impossible for an implementation to be
>>> conforming yet incapable of running any useful programs.
>> 
>> The Implementation Limits section of the Standard requires that for every
>> implementation there must exist at least one program which exercises all
>> of the implementation limits described in the Standard, and which that
>> implementation will process without UB.  The rationale makes very clear
>> that the Standard does not require that an implementation be capable of
>> running all such programs, since a program which exercised all limitations
>> simultaneously would require over a megabyte of storage, and many computers
>> in 1989 weren't that big.  The stated intention in the rationale is that
>> someone who is trying to make a useful implementation which doesn't get
>> tripped up by any of the limits in isolation will likely produce an
>> implementation that can accommodate them in useful combinations, but the
>> Standard doesn't actually mandate that an implementation be capable of
>> running more than one possibly-contrived program.
>> 
>
> The Standard requires a conforming implementation must process all
> conforming programs.  If it does not, it is not a conforming
> implementation.

Either you have that backwards or you are confusing a conforming program
with a /strictly/ conforming program.  Section 4 defines the term
"conforming program":

  7.  A conforming program is one that is acceptable to a conforming
      implementation.

The same section defines a conforming (hosted) implementation as one the
must accept any strictly conforming program.

So here's a counter-example -- a conforming program that a conforming
implementation is not obliged to accept:

  int main(void) { return -1 >> 1, 0; }

> Hardware limitations such as memory limits are not part of the Standard.

-- 
Ben.

Thread

Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2016-10-04 11:02 -0700
  Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2016-10-04 19:00 +0000
    Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2016-10-04 12:08 -0700
      Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-10-04 21:56 +0200
        Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2016-10-04 13:06 -0700
      Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-10-04 21:29 +0100
        Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2016-10-04 13:46 -0700
          Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-10-05 00:30 +0100
            Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2016-10-04 16:58 -0700
              Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2016-10-05 01:07 +0000
            Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-10-05 08:07 -0700
              Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2016-10-05 11:51 -0700
                Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-10-05 14:08 -0700
                Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2016-10-05 14:25 -0700
                Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-10-05 18:03 -0700
                Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2016-10-05 18:13 -0700
                Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-10-05 19:08 -0700
                Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2016-10-05 19:18 -0700
                Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-10-05 19:31 -0700
                Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2016-10-05 19:43 -0700
                Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-10-05 22:22 -0400
                Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-10-06 09:56 +0200
                Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2016-10-06 04:54 -0700
                Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) mark.bluemel@gmail.com - 2016-10-06 05:06 -0700
                Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2016-10-06 05:27 -0700
                Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2016-10-06 05:32 -0700
          Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-10-04 19:12 -0700
      Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-10-05 13:42 +1300
        Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2016-10-05 04:53 -0700
          Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-10-05 05:04 -0700
            Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2016-10-05 05:12 -0700
  Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) Anand Hariharan <mailto.anand.hariharan@gmail.com> - 2016-10-07 15:02 -0700
    Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-10-07 16:17 -0700
      Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-07 18:11 -0700
        Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2016-10-07 23:53 -0400
          Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-10-08 01:12 -0700
            Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2016-10-08 08:05 -0700
              Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-10-08 10:15 -0700
          Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-10-08 02:17 -0700
            Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2016-10-08 11:02 +0000
              Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2016-10-08 05:14 -0700
              Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-10-08 12:20 -0700
                Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-10-08 15:31 -0700
                Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-10-08 15:58 -0700
                Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-10-08 17:46 -0700
            Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2016-10-08 08:09 -0700
          Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-10-08 14:49 -0700
            Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2016-10-09 11:12 -0400
      Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-10-07 21:15 -0400
        Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-10-08 01:02 -0700
          Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-10-08 06:04 -0400
            Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-10-08 11:45 +0100
              Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-10-08 16:57 -0400
                Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-10-09 01:25 +0100
                Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-10-08 21:29 -0400
            Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2016-10-08 07:49 -0700
              Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2016-10-08 08:04 -0700
              Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-10-08 16:58 -0400
                Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2016-10-08 14:42 -0700
                Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-10-08 15:08 -0700
                Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-10-08 19:27 -0400
                Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-10-08 16:37 -0700
                Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-10-08 21:30 -0400
    Re: Most important aspect of any compiler (C or otherwise) "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2016-10-07 18:31 -0700

csiph-web