Date:	Thu, 18 May 2000 11:30:33 +0300 (IDT)
From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender:	eliz AT is
To:	"Alexei A. Frounze" <alex DOT fru AT mtu-net DOT ru>
cc:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: C++, complex, etc
In-Reply-To:	<3922E117.561584EE@mtu-net.ru>
Message-ID:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.1000518113013.12245H-100000@is>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Wed, 17 May 2000, Alexei A. Frounze wrote:

> I simply flame because C++ library implementations are different in
> different compilers.

Welcome to C++.  If you don't like languages that are not standardized
enough, don't use C++, at least not just yet.

> > > Btw, what so I need size_t for, if both size_t and
> > > int equal the same machine word?
> > 
> > *If*. But how on earth is a program supposed to know if that condition
> > holds, on the compiler it's being put through?
> 
> I don't understand your phrase. Please tell it in other words, if possible.

You said "if both size_t and int equal the same machine word".
Hans-Bernhard is telling you that that's a big ``if'', and a portable
program cannot rely on that fact, or even verify it reliably.

- Raw text -