Test your C/C++ Skills [Free Online Test]

[pmp]

free online test of c/c++ try now http://www.itworld2.com

 

[Phil Carmody]

If you take away all the registration stuff, I'll be glad to take a
look at it.

I'd say that c/c++ is undefined...

Phil

 

[Keith Thompson]

It depends on the definition of "c".

For example, given the definition "const int c;", the expression
"c/c++" is well defined. (FSVO "defined".)

It's a constraint violation. The only requirement on the
implementation is that it must produce a diagnostic. Once it's
produced that diagnostic, it's free to continue to translate the
program, which may then execute but whose behavior is not defined
by the standard.

 

[Flash Gordon]

It's a constraint violation. The only requirement on the
implementation is that it must produce a diagnostic.

Which, of course, is the 'VI "defined"' to hich Kenneth was referring.

Once it's
produced that diagnostic, it's free to continue to translate the
program, which may then execute but whose behavior is not defined
by the standard.

True, but it's defined as producing a diagnostic during translation.

 

[Keith Thompson]

Which, of course, is the 'VI "defined"' to hich Kenneth was referring.


True, but it's defined as producing a diagnostic during translation.

Pedant!

 

[Keith Thompson]

Thanks.


This group thrives on pedantry.

Okay, what about:

extern void c(void);

Are we in the realm of "must fail to compile" yet?

Nope. The only case where something "must fail to compile" is
when a #error directive survives any #if and #ifdef directives.
In all other cases (constraint violations, syntax rule violations,
undefined behavior, hard drive containing source has lost power), the
compiler is free to proceed after issuing any required diagnostics.

 

[Keith Thompson]

That's what I remembered after clicking "send". :-|

(And, of course, macros can't expand to preprocessor directives.)

So, technically, syntax rule violations are also UB? (Can a compiler
print a diagnostic and then reformat the hard drive, and still be
"conforming"?)

Yes. When you sue the vendor for reformatting your hard drive, you
won't be able to claim that the compiler is non-conforming.

 

[Phil Carmody]

That's what I remembered after clicking "send". :-|

(And, of course, macros can't expand to preprocessor directives.)

So, technically, syntax rule violations are also UB? (Can a compiler
print a diagnostic and then reformat the hard drive, and still be
"conforming"?)

We prefer to call that model the 'conformatting' version.

Phil