Re: [boost] [uuid] Interface

Subject: Re: [boost] [uuid] Interface
From: Scott McMurray (me22.ca+boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-12-20 22:56:22

On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 22:31, Scott McMurray <me22.ca+boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> 1) The committee does not like to have the semantics of well-formed
> programs in one revision of the standard have different semantics in a
> later revision, and as such will only make such changes if they are
> unavoidable or, possibly, if they are determined to not affect any
> cases of consequence.
>

Sorry, I just realized I'm using the wrong term here. (Well-formed
programs can invoke UB, and removing UB is obviously something the
committee likes, where reasonable.)

It should read, "The committee does not like for programs with
well-defined semantics (i.e. those that are well-formed and invoke
neither undefined, implementation-defined, nor unspecified behaviour)
in one revision of the standard have different semantics in a later
revision, and ..."