From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=NO_RELAYS autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 Received: by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix, from userid 18041) id DB8F7BC6B; Thu, 8 Nov 2007 20:09:03 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2007 20:09:03 +0100 To: Alexandre Pilkiewicz Cc: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Smoke Vector Graphics: source code licenses for sale Message-ID: <20071108190903.GB19567@yquem.inria.fr> References: <200711041201.10255.jon@ffconsultancy.com> <1194188801.472de001905ce@webmail.in-berlin.de> <1194192721.25159.14.camel@rosella.wigram> <200711081928.11501.alexandre.pilkiewicz@polytechnique.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200711081928.11501.alexandre.pilkiewicz@polytechnique.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i From: maranget@yquem.inria.fr (Luc Maranget) X-Spam: no; 0.00; maranget:01 maranget:01 unspecified:01 unspecified:01 smoke:98 luc:01 luc:01 caml-list:01 argument:02 argument:02 graphics:02 bugs:03 vector:05 remind:06 inria:06 > And so many things are just unspecified. I know it's a bad idea, whatever > language you use, to rely on the order of evaluation of the argument of a > function, but to say "this order may change one day" is to tell > industrialists : "if you have some "not so good" programmers, even if you > make all the test you want on your program to check it works, one day it may > just stop working because we changed the order or evaluation, or worst, a lot > of silent bugs can appear". I cannot resist to remind you that the order of argument evaluation is unspecified in C. Arguably a bad design, but not sufficient to frighten industry. -- Luc