Ian Jackson wrote:
Furthermore, the broken behaviour is NOT THE STANDARD.
LET ME SAY THAT AGAIN: THE BROKEN BEHAVIOUR IS *NOT THE STANDARD*
LET ME SAY THAT AGAIN: THE BROKEN BEHAVIOUR IS *NOT THE STANDARD*
LET ME SAY THAT AGAIN: THE BROKEN BEHAVIOUR IS *NOT THE STANDARD*
LET ME SAY THAT AGAIN: THE BROKEN BEHAVIOUR IS *NOT THE STANDARD*
LET ME SAY THAT AGAIN: THE BROKEN BEHAVIOUR IS *NOT THE STANDARD*
Anyway it is not the point: do we have a 100% C++ conforming compiler,
do we have a 100% conforming POSIX system? [1]
So I don't think we should follow 100% the STD (and I think nobody
do because some old broken (or unused) behavior: see SMTP (privacy,
relaying, routing mail), TCP (IIRC there was some buggy wording that
cause DoS on TCP connection start), STD5-RFC950 "Internet Standard
Subnetting Procedure", ...)
So also if it was (or if it became) "standard", it doesn't mean that
we should apply literally.
ciao
cate
[1] We are becoming more posixly, also because POSIX adapts
to Linux usage, so not following a insane standard is the
quick way to have correction to the standard and be more
standardized.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
