[ub] Justification for < not being a total order on pointers?

Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at axiomatics.org
Thu Oct 17 17:17:01 CEST 2013


Nevin Liber <nevin at eviloverlord.com> writes:

| On 17 October 2013 03:38, Peter Sommerlad <peter.sommerlad at hsr.ch> wrote:
| 
|     Hi, just to throw in my 0.02 CHF:
|     On 17.10.2013, at 07:27, Nevin Liber <nevin at eviloverlord.com> wrote:
| 
| 
|     Well, I dream the future with non-uniform memory architectures might make
|     that argument wrong again. We might have "pointers" that differ
|     substantially, depending if the memory address resides in RAM "directly"
|     attached to a CPU or on a different CPU or on a GPU. And comparing such
|     pointers wildly might not be the thing you should be allowed to do.
| 
|     Just remember, technology development often goes in circles, e.g., we get
|     electric cars again after 100+ years, we are reinventing parallel
|     programming (a lot of work from the 70s/80s gets rediscovered), etc.
| 
| 
| I understand the fear argument, because (so far) that is the only argument
| being made for not changing the standard to match existing practice.

It is the "only argument being made" once you dismiss all the others you
do not agree with :-)

-- Gaby


More information about the ub mailing list