standards

The XForms standard page seemed to indicate that it was no longer live, and that html5 kinda sorta does the job now. Is this the case? I'm looking at storing heterogenous data nuggets as XML fragments - generating a editor page according to the datatype. ebruchez To add to Phil's answer: The XForms Working Group at W3C is active and currently working on XForms 2.0. See in particular the proposed 2.0 features on the wiki and the in-progress draft of the spec as of Feburary, 2012 . Also I don't think it's fair to say that HTML 5 "does the job". HTML 5 forms bring small and welcome improvements

In the following piece of code ( live on coliru ): #include <iostream> #include <string> int main() { struct S { operator bool () const { return false; } operator std::string () const { return "false"; } } s; std::cout << s << "\n"; // outputs 0 } How does the compiler choose to pick the implicit conversion to bool over std::string ? My hypothesis is that in this case, it might be purely the order of declaration of the different flavours of std::basic_ostream::operator<< , but is it all? Does the standard say something about picking a specific implicit conversion? Recall that std::string is

In the following code is is guaranteed that "0\n" be printed? #include <stdio.h> int main(void) { int c = 0; printf("%d\n",c); printf("%d,%d\n",++c,++c); } More generally, if a program has undefined behavior does the entire program become undefined or only from the sequence point that begins the problematic code? Please note: I am not asking about what the compiler does with the second printf. I am asking if the first printf is guaranteed to occur. I know that undefined behavior is capable of blowing up your computer, crashing your program, or whatnot. Well even ignoring things like "Anything

Something I noticed just now. Definition of exception in the standard (18.6.1): class exception { public : exception() throw(); exception(const exception &) throw(); exception& operator=(const exception&) throw(); virtual ~exception() throw(); virtual const char* what() const throw(); }; Definition of exception in MSDN : class exception { public: exception(); exception(const char *const&); exception(const char *const&, int); exception(const exception&); exception& operator=(const exception&); virtual ~exception(); virtual const char *what() const; }; It would seem that Microsoft's version

I need a few input elements, but their values won't be submitted anywhere - they're just going to be manipulated by some client-side JavaScript. Do I have to place them in a <form> to have legit HTML, or can they just be free-standing? For additional information, in xhtml strict you have to place in one of these elements: "ins", "del", "h1", "h2", "h3", "h4", "h5", "h6", "p", "div", "address", "fieldset" No. You only need a form if you're submitting to a server. 来源： https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2862050/in-proper-html-must-an-input-be-in-a-form

In the C++11 standard, section 1.10/5 mentions, but does not formally define the terms acquire operation , release operation , and consume operation . It then goes on in Section 29 to use these terms to describe the actions of certain memory orderings, atomic operations, and memory fences. For instance, 29.3/1 on "Order and Consistency" states: memory_order_release , memory_order_acq_rel , and memory_order_seq_cst : a store operation performs a release operation [emphasis added] on the affected memory location. This type of language is repeated throughout section 29, but it bothers me a bit

Is this code legal?: #include <stdio.h> typedef struct a_d{ int const x; } a_d; int a_d__ctor(a_d *X) { *(int*)&X->x = 42; //<-- legal or not? return 0; } int main() { a_d a; a_d__ctor(&a); printf("a.x=%d\n", a.x); } Modyfing an object declared with const qualifier invokes undefined behavior . According to the Standard (emphasis mine): C11 6.7.3/6 Type qualifiers If an attempt is made to modify an object defined with a const-qualified type through use of an lvalue with non-const-qualified type , the behavior is undefined. 来源： https://stackoverflow.com/questions/42056823/can-i-write-to-a-const