On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 12:36 PM, Regan, Brian (EPC COE) <brian.re...@honeywell.com> wrote: > Don't misunderstand - I like the behaviour. I don't want the unnecessary > implicit conversions). > > My concern stems only from the compliance to the standard. Some of our > internal software standards require ISO99 compliance, as do standards imposed > by our customers (e.g. Boeing via their D6).
The behavior is compliant. The results are as-if the implicit conversion happened, in all respects that ISO 9899 specifies. > If what I think is happening is actually happening, I can document a > deviation. What do you think is non-compliant? This appears to be trivially allowed under the as-if rule. > I just want to make sure that I am not missing something before going that > route. You appear to be looking at things that are not observable behavior. The compiler is permitted to do anything that doesn't change observable behavior, such as optimizing to avoid a redundant conversion. The standard doesn't specify _how_ the generated code gets the right results, so long as it does. -- James
