>>118
Of course, all memory is ordered on a computer, and memory itself corresponds to some particular circuit with a particular structure and so on.
I never said nor implied anything about the memory you halfwit. I was talking about the value(stored) in that memory.
>Unordered in programming means that there is a "contract" where you don't use the order, or merely don't expose the order through some interface - the internals of how you hold the items is irrelevant.
Bullshit. There is no contract involved if I fill an existing array with a series of random values.
I wanted this discussion to be civil, so I refrained from resort to restating your past history as >>113 did, but it's hard to do so when you keep confusing interfaces with implementations, and the "what should be" with "what is".
This has nothing to do with interfaces or implementations. This is abstracting shit you fucking idiot.