Re: Behavior when a do-iterator is changed

On Nov 20, 1:37 am, "James Van Buskirk" <not_va...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

So I'm still having problems with this standard conforming code
over here in Win-64 land...

Your code is nonconforming. See my other post. The standard forbids
a program that causes a do-variable to become redefined or undefined
while the do-loop is active. Your program is clearly redefining the