Why doesn't the C++ committee just add something to the spec that states that under/overflows must do whatever the target CPU's behavior is?
-
-
@cmuratori@natbro So saying that the CPU is in charge makes porting _more_ likely to work than it does now. -
@cmuratori@natbro It takes compilers out of the equation, and leaves only CPUs, instead of having _both_ like we do now. - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.