[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Issue: ADJUST-ARRAY-NOT-ADJUSTABLE (Version 6)
- To: gls@Think.COM
- Subject: Issue: ADJUST-ARRAY-NOT-ADJUSTABLE (Version 6)
- From: Jon L White <email@example.com>
- Date: Fri, 17 Mar 89 15:50:11 PST
- Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
- In-reply-to: Guy Steele's message of Fri, 17 Mar 89 16:38:55 EST <8903172138.AA09505@verdi.think.com>
re: Under the strict interpretation implementation (A) is incorrect by
definition. Under the liberal interpretation implementation (A) is
correct, and accomplishes a useful purpose. ...
Guy, I'm totally confused by your "analysis" now; the whole point of
the example is to show that portability is sacrificed under what you are
calling the "liberal" interpretation -- that altering the CLtL semantics
of SIMPLE-ARRAY makes it non portable. As I look back into your
previous msg, I see that you did say:
Now, the two implementations behave differently on the example, and that
is a cause for concern.
Also, your statement just quoted above shows the variations possible under
implementation (A) and (B), thus reiterating the non-portability question
I brought up. Thus you'll have to admit that my example showed *exactly*
what I claimed it did.
However, I disagree with your judgement -- that it is better to accept an
interpretation that allows more variation among implementations -- because
the variation you are thereby accommodating means that the type is no longer
portable. We may be stuck with that position, but I don't agree that it
is a good thing.
-- JonL --