[ub] [c++std-core-23844] Re: unions and undefined behavior

Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at cs.tamu.edu
Thu Jul 25 01:48:38 CEST 2013


Howard Hinnant <howard.hinnant at gmail.com> writes:

| On Jul 24, 2013, at 6:32 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at cs.tamu.edu> wrote:
| 
| > Howard Hinnant <howard.hinnant at gmail.com> writes:
| > 
| > [...]
| > 
| > | > Does that make sense?
| > | 
| > | Absolutely makes sense.  And if we had a clean slate to work with,
| > | that's exactly what I would recommend.
| > 
| > At the risk of beating a dead horse, back in 1997, Valentin Bonnard
| > reported this issue.  It was quickly classified as a NAD -- for reasons
| > that puzzled us on the AFNOR group at the time.  But yes, we had a
| > cleaner slate then than we do now.
| 
| That must've been just before we started the current form of the LWG
| issues list.  Shame, I would've liked to have read the issue.  I
| checked here:
| 
| http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/1997/N1148.pdf
| 
| but didn't see it.
| 
| I like to follow the history & evolution of our decisions, and
| sometimes I learn things from it.
| 
| Howard

Indeed; I am surprised that a google search with "Valentin Bonnard" and
"LWG defects" or "map value_type" returned almost nothing.  And
since he hasn't been active in the C++ community we lost valuable
history (he used to keep a tab of the issues he reported.)  The closest
I came to with google exercise is

  http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2002/n1391.html#103


[ we used to make a joke about this, along the line the quick
classification as NAD may have come from the impression that this is
just the French complaining again :-) ] 

-- Gaby


More information about the ub mailing list