Specifications specify, they do not define. Define is defined as: To describe, explain, or make definite and clear;. You cannot define what will be; only what is.

Implementations do not define, they implement. If they implement the specifications incorrectly--whether by design or error--the resultant behaviour does not meet the specification and so is not conforming; but the behaviour, whatever it may be, still exists. And by recording that behaviour, that behaviour is defined. Right or wrong, the behaviour is described; explained; made definite and clear. Conformant or not, that implementation's behaviour is defined by what actually happens.

Just as a child's behaviour is defined (described, explained etc.), by what they actually do; not by what his mother says they should or will do.

If specifications defined, then no implementation could ever be in error. Not just unreasonable or illogical, but impossible.

If implementations defined, then the first implementation's choices--bugs'n all--would forever preclude any other implementation from doing anything different--whether by design or error. Again, unreasonable, illogical and impossible.

There is a world of difference between "implementation defined" (which should almost certainly be "implementor's define" or better "decide"), and 'defined by the implementation'.

The former implies predefinition. And the very existance of that word implies that before-the-fact decisions are quite different from after-the-fact determinations.

But let me guess, you're still going to claim to not understand the difference, right?

Wrong! I understand the difference that the two phrases are intended to signify. My hope was that the process of trying to differentiate the phrases in writing would make their failure to meet those intents, as clear to you as they are to me.

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
"Too many [] have been sedated by an oppressive environment of political correctness and risk aversion."

In reply to Re^6: The behavior is [sic] undefined by BrowserUk
in thread The behavior is [sic] undefined by John M. Dlugosz

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post, it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":


  • Posts are HTML formatted. Put <p> </p> tags around your paragraphs. Put <code> </code> tags around your code and data!
  • Titles consisting of a single word are discouraged, and in most cases are disallowed outright.
  • Read Where should I post X? if you're not absolutely sure you're posting in the right place.
  • Please read these before you post! —
  • Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags:
    a, abbr, b, big, blockquote, br, caption, center, col, colgroup, dd, del, details, div, dl, dt, em, font, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, hr, i, ins, li, ol, p, pre, readmore, small, span, spoiler, strike, strong, sub, summary, sup, table, tbody, td, tfoot, th, thead, tr, tt, u, ul, wbr
  • You may need to use entities for some characters, as follows. (Exception: Within code tags, you can put the characters literally.)
            For:     Use:
    & &amp;
    < &lt;
    > &gt;
    [ &#91;
    ] &#93;
  • Link using PerlMonks shortcuts! What shortcuts can I use for linking?
  • See Writeup Formatting Tips and other pages linked from there for more info.