🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <313B34C0.2B6C@oc.com> Larry Weiss <lfw@oc.com> writes:

|> Thomas Koenig wrote:
|>  > 
|>  > In comp.std.c, seebs@solutions.solon.com (Peter Seebach) wrote:
|>  > >It is, in no place, unreasonable to assume that C means "ANSI C".
|>  > 
|>  > I usually prefer "ISO C", but that's a very minor point, I think :-)

|> I use "Standard C" and do hope that there is only one standardization
|> process that has that charter.

From what I have heard, there almost were two C standards, one ANSI,
and one, different, ISO.  It was only a remark made in passing in the
ANSI committee that made the committee aware that the standard they
were about to pass would not be adapted `as is' by ANSI.  Adding the
internationalization aspects that ISO required probably cost ANSI
about a year, but it did avoid two divergent standards.

The current C++ standardization effort, and I imagine, the next
version of the C standard, are being developed as a joint effort from
the beginning, in order to avoid this kind of problem.
-- 
James Kanze         Tel.: (+33) 88 14 49 00        email: kanze@gabi-soft.fr
GABI Software, Sarl., 8 rue des Francs-Bourgeois, F-67000 Strasbourg, France
Conseils, études et réalisations en logiciel orienté objet --
                -- A la recherche d'une activité dans une region francophone