Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 03:29:27 +0000
Thank you for following through!
And taking care of the ‘memcpy’ and ‘memmove’ thingies.
When we say that the operations implicitly creates an object, are we also to require that the bits patterns there be valid object representation? That would impose a severe restriction…
From: ub-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:ub-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Richard Smith
Sent: Friday, February 9, 2018 11:52 AM
To: ub_at_[hidden]
Subject: [ub] new revision of p0593
Hi all,
Please find attached a revised version of P0593 based on the excellent discussion and feedback at the Albuquerque meeting. Please let me know if you have any comments; I believe our plan was to discuss this again at Jacksonville, and all being well, to forward it to EWG at that meeting.
Best regards,
Richard
And taking care of the ‘memcpy’ and ‘memmove’ thingies.
When we say that the operations implicitly creates an object, are we also to require that the bits patterns there be valid object representation? That would impose a severe restriction…
From: ub-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:ub-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Richard Smith
Sent: Friday, February 9, 2018 11:52 AM
To: ub_at_[hidden]
Subject: [ub] new revision of p0593
Hi all,
Please find attached a revised version of P0593 based on the excellent discussion and feedback at the Albuquerque meeting. Please let me know if you have any comments; I believe our plan was to discuss this again at Jacksonville, and all being well, to forward it to EWG at that meeting.
Best regards,
Richard
Received on 2018-02-12 04:29:32