On Monday 28 April 2008 16:02, Bill Long wrote:

The only thing you skip is argument conformance checking. It may be the "only thing" for the purposes of the compiler. But for a language, it makes any program which makes such a mismatch ill-defined. This was the whole point of introducing interfaces---to check against bad programs. Explicitly allowing semantically undefined programs is highly dubious, to say the least. I would never support such a proposal. And I am sure all non-vendor people on J3 won't either. Program safety and clarity has always been a goal for those people, and with a good purpose: To provide a check for compiler vendors who vote based on other principles... Best, Aleks

-- Aleksandar Donev, Ph.D. Lawrence Postdoctoral Fellow @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory High Performance Computational Materials Science and Chemistry E-mail: [email protected] Phone: (925) 424-6816 Fax: (925) 423-0785 Address: P.O.Box 808, L-367, Livermore, CA 94551-9900 Web: http://cherrypit.princeton.edu/donev