Compilers implement the parts of the standard they agree with, in the way they think is best. They also implement it in the way they understand the standardese.
Read a complex enough project that's meant to be used across compiler venrdos and versions, and you'll find plenty of instances where they're working around the compiler not implementing the standard.
Also, if you attended the standards committee, you would hear plenty of complaints from compiler vendors that certain things are implementable. Sometimes the committee listens and makes changes, other times they put their fingers in their ears and ignore reality.
There are also plenty of places where the standard lets the compiler make it's own decision (implementation defined behavior). You need to know what your compiler vendor(s) chose to do.
tl;dr: With a standard as complex as C++'s, the compilers very much do not just "implement the standard". Sometimes you can get away with pretending that, but others very much not.
The standard (to the extent that it is implemented) is implemented by compilers.
At this point this whole thread has nothing to do with my original point, just weird one-upping all around
I was thinking the same thing. Would it be permissible to bring each underpayment to small claims court as a separate case? If enough doctors did this, it would very quickly be a legal DDoS attack, like we've seen happen with mandatory arbitration.
You're supposed to keep a glass of water with a bit of chlorine bleach (to obtain roughly 300 ppm) handy for wiping your tools and surfaces down as you work. Not that anyone teaches Home Economics at school any longer.
This is what I learned in cooking school but also never actually saw in practice in restaurants I worked in (which were fine-ish dining in the Bay Area).
Taking a piece of metal or a plate that has any oily or other non-water-soluble food on it, rinsing it, and chlorinating it results in a mess that might indeed be non-infectious but is otherwise disgusting. Also, leaving a piece of stainless steel covered in chloride (which that bleach will turn into) is one of the worst things you could credibly do to it in a kitchen context. (And, while the relevant regulators don’t seem to care about disinfection byproducts in a kitchen, all those residual organics that didn’t get removed plus hypochlorous acid seem like they would thoroughly fail most drinking water standards.)
Also, I don’t know what all the food safety and dishwasher vendors are telling their customers, but that nice residual chlorine has a tasty and odor that is not appetizing at all. But you can also legally disinfect your dishes and such with sufficiently hot water, and you can buy a commercial dishwasher that does that instead of using chlorine.
In a home context, what’s wrong with dish soap and a sponge or brush? In a commercial kitchen that really wants to be compliant could use dish soap followed by a (very) hot rinse. The average household instant hot water tap is plenty hot for this, too, although demonstrably hitting those HACCP targets might be tricky.
Read a complex enough project that's meant to be used across compiler venrdos and versions, and you'll find plenty of instances where they're working around the compiler not implementing the standard.
Also, if you attended the standards committee, you would hear plenty of complaints from compiler vendors that certain things are implementable. Sometimes the committee listens and makes changes, other times they put their fingers in their ears and ignore reality.
There are also plenty of places where the standard lets the compiler make it's own decision (implementation defined behavior). You need to know what your compiler vendor(s) chose to do.
tl;dr: With a standard as complex as C++'s, the compilers very much do not just "implement the standard". Sometimes you can get away with pretending that, but others very much not.
reply