🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <danpop.826218405@rscernix> danpop@mail.cern.ch (Dan Pop)
writes:

|> In <KANZE.96Mar5131710@slsvgqt.lts.sel.alcatel.de> kanze@lts.sel.alcatel.de (James Kanze US/ESC 60/3/141 #40763) writes:

|> >In article <4hfecl$33t@solutions.solon.com> seebs@solutions.solon.com
|> >(Peter Seebach) writes:
|> >
|> >|> In article <4hf9m1$fp8@fg70.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de>,
|> >|> Thomas Koenig <Thomas.Koenig@ciw.uni-karlsruhe.de> 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 :-)
|> >
|> >|> Yes, especially since ANSI adopted ISO's standard.  They are expected
|> >|> to be identical, except for the occasional lag between meetings of one
|> >|> and meetings of the other.
|> >
|> >I don't think that that was Thomas' point.  If you look at our email
|> >domains, you will realize that with regards to standardization, ANSI
|> >has about the same weight as K&R for us:-).  An ANSI standard is a
|> >standard in the United States, but not, or at least not de jura,
|> >elsewhere.  (In practice, of course, in the absense of a competing ISO
|> >standard, ANSI standards tend to become de facto standards even here.)

|> I think that the point is missed by both Thomas and James.  Everybody
|> agrees that the C standard is the ISO one.  However, the name that caught
|> on is _ANSI_ C whether we Europeans like it or not.  I have yet to see
|> a C book with the string "ISO C" on its cover.  Except for relatively
|> few people, "ISO C" is rather meaningless to the C users community,  while
|> "ANSI C" denotes the language described in K&R2.  Compiler documentation 
|> keeps talking about ANSI conformance and -ansi options are quite popular.

We didn't miss it, we just don't agree:-).  Except for a relatively few
people, a program with `void main()' is a legal ANSI C program, too.
IMHO, talking about ANSI C is about the same as writing `void main()';
it generally works, and most people/compilers will know what you are
talking about, but that doesn't make it right.

With regards to the -ansi options: for the most part, they just turn on
function prototyping, and maybe make a few changes in the preprocessor.
They don't necessarily make the compiler ISO conformant.  (On at least
one of my compilers, to get anything close to ISO conformance, the
option is `-ansi -pendantic', and not just -ansi.)
-- 
James Kanze           (+33) 88 14 49 00          email: kanze@gabi-soft.fr
GABI Software, Sarl., 8 rue des Francs Bourgeois, 67000 Strasbourg, France
Conseils, études et réalisations en logiciel orienté objet --
              -- A la recherche d'une activité dans une region francophone