Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!brl-adm!brl-smoke!gwyn From: gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn ) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: incrementing after a cast Message-ID: <5447@brl-smoke.ARPA> Date: Mon, 15-Dec-86 11:30:26 EST Article-I.D.: brl-smok.5447 Posted: Mon Dec 15 11:30:26 1986 Date-Received: Tue, 16-Dec-86 21:00:02 EST References: <349@apple.UUCP> <7376@utzoo.UUCP> <1746@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu> <264@bobkat.UUCP> Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB)) Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD. Lines: 43 In article <264@bobkat.UUCP> m5d@bobkat.UUCP (Mr Mike McNally) writes: >I think that further suggestions along the lines of "let's change the >language so I can do something disallowed for good reason in the >existing language" should be directed to the ANSI committee, where they >hopefully will be directed to the ANSI wastebasket. Well, if you send an official comment on the proposed draft standard to ANSI, they will eventually send it to the X3J11 committee, who have to evaluate the comment and provide a response. It would be to everybody's advantage if only well thought-out comments (including persuasive arguments and specific wording for any proposed changes) are submitted. Note that a common reason for rejecting suggestions is, approximately: "new invention; conflicts with existing practice; need not convincingly shown; accomplishable with existing facilities". Changes are, however, made when appropriate. Here is an *unofficial* list of changes approved at last week's X3J11 meeting: several editorial changes, mostly for clarification exit() status argument for success is 0 or EXIT_SUCCESS; for failure, EXIT_FAILURE; other status values have implementation-defined meaning DBL_DIG and LDBL_DIG minimum values to be increased, probably to 10 portable guaranteed subset for #include names to be provided section 4.5.6.4 Description: delete 2nd sentence; Returns: add: if y is 0, fmod returns 0.0. permit stripping of trailing blanks from text input lines name of strcoll() changed to strxfrm(); new routine just like X/OPEN nl_strcmp() now called strcoll() (this can cause confusion unless one specifies "new strcoll()" or "old strcoll() as in published draft") malloc(0) meaning is now implementation-defined (a majority wanted it to allocate a distinct pointer, but it takes a 2/3 majority to make changes to the draft now) I post these in the hope that if you were thinking about recommending one of these changes, you will now be spared the effort of writing up the comment.