ambiguous ?

[P E Smee]

In article <1989Oct17.203733.23121 at utzoo.uucp> henry at utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes:
>A more accurate definition of _implementation_ _defined_ is that the
>behavior is determined by the implementation *and must be documented*.
>Otherwise it doesn't differ from _unspecified_ in any useful way.
>
How about, as a pragmatic distinction, the idea that if your program
relies on some effect of Implementation Defined behavior, it is correct
but non-portable; while if it relies on some effect of Unspecified
behavior, it is an incorrect program. ?
-- 
 Paul Smee               |    JANET: Smee at uk.ac.bristol
 Computer Centre         |   BITNET: Smee%uk.ac.bristol at ukacrl.bitnet
 University of Bristol   | Internet: Smee%uk.ac.bristol at nsfnet-relay.ac.uk
 (Phone: +44 272 303132) |     UUCP: ...!mcvax!ukc!gdr.bath.ac.uk!exspes