ado@elsie.UUCP (Arthur David Olson) (03/05/88)
In article <1988Mar3.185806.1356@utzoo.uucp>, henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: > > ... recent drafts > > do not say that implementers may reserve *only* those identifiers. > > If you read section 1.7 very carefully and thoughtfully, you may change > your mind. Assume your compiler reserves "xyz". Is a program which is > otherwise "strictly conforming" rendered not so by using "xyz" for its > own purposes? No. Sorry; my reading says the answer is "Yes." Section 1.7 says "A strictly conforming program shall use only those features of the language and library specified in this Standard. It shall not produce output dependent on any unspecified, undefined, or implementation-defined behavior. . ." And Section 4.2 says "If [a] program defines an external identifier with the same name as a reserved external identifier. . .the behavior is undefined." So: if the compiler reserves "xyz", programs that use xyz have behavior that's undefined and are thus not strictly conforming. -- ado@vax2.nlm.nih.gov ADO, VAX, and NIH are Ampex and DEC trademarks