Re: #define and (brackets)

Tech-Archive recommends: Fix windows errors by optimizing your registry

"Tommy" <bad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:uATfpfcUJHA.4372@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
First, If an RFC or a STD was published TODAY as an update, that does
not BREAK existing systems.

New versions of C and C++ standards work hard not to render existing
programs invalid (though it does happen).

Specific versions of C and C++ compilers typically claim conformance
with a specific version of the standard. Thus, when new version of the
standard is released, existing compilers remain conformant with the
previous version (or at least, as conformant as they ever were).
Compiler authors then proceed to work on making future versions of their
compilers conformant with the new version of the standard.

In fact, many do disagree with an update
and simply ignore it.

Maybe this is common with mail systems, but not with C++ compilers. All
major compiler vendors are thoroughly represented when the new standard
is drafted. All decisions are made by consensus. The fact that the
standard is released at all means that all interested parties have
signed off on it. It's not like some external force tries to foist the
new text on unsuspecting population.

That does not make them "BUGGY." Case in
point, The SMTP STD standard is 26 years old. There is NO UPDATED
STD, just a 8 years old RFC. Legacy software supporting only the STD
still work and not supporting what is considered the pseudo-standard
RFC does not make them buggy and non-conforming.

By definition, they are non-conforming with said RFC, aren't they?

You seem to be talking about RFC 2821. What new features does it add
compared to the previous RFCs or standards? I can't help but notice that
it begins with the phrase "[This document] consolidates, updates and
clarifies, but doesn't add new or change existing functionality...".

Second, if you guys reference a DRAFT C/C++ standard document that is
analogous to an RFC.

Everything I said in this thread is true against ISO/IEC 14882:1998 aka
C++98, as well as the C++0x draft (which didn't change the description
of the phases of translation in any significant way, if at all; I
haven't compared the two texts character by character).

So for one to continue to suggest that a long existing compilers are
magically BUGGY because it may not follow verbatim an ever evolving
standard or draft today is just plain silly, unrealistic.

A compiler is buggy when it doesn't follow the standard it claims to
conform to.
--
With best wishes,
Igor Tandetnik

With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not
necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are going to
land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly
overhead. -- RFC 1925


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Announcing XSig - Xnews Companion
    ... it's also in the GNKSA (Good Net-Keeping ... Son of RFC 1036 has no authority. ... Son of RFC 1036 is the *de-facto* article format standard. ...
    (news.software.readers)
  • Re: Announcing XSig - Xnews Companion
    ... The GNKSA is a valuable resource ... when choosing a newsreader. ... Son of RFC 1036 is, in some places, *wrong*. ... that Son of RFC 1036 is the de-facto article format standard, ...
    (news.software.readers)
  • Re: Announcing XSig - Xnews Companion
    ... it's also in the GNKSA (Good Net-Keeping ... Son of RFC 1036 has no authority. ... Son of RFC 1036 is the *de-facto* article format standard. ...
    (news.software.readers)
  • Re: Announcing XSig - Xnews Companion
    ... Son of RFC 1036 has no authority. ... Son of RFC 1036 is the *de-facto* article format standard. ... of the signature standard, i.e. the 'sig-dash' delimiter, and *not* to ...
    (news.software.readers)
  • Re: Spam and using a real email address
    ... Internet Mail Extensions " (RFC 2045). ... where this standard and earlier documents or practices conflict, ... In most such cases, current practice is ... Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six ...
    (news.software.readers)