Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mcvax!botter!ark.cs.vu.nl!maart From: maart@cs.vu.nl (Maarten Litmaath) Newsgroups: comp.std.c Subject: Re: Why trigraphs? What happened to the DIgraphs? Message-ID: <1305@ark.cs.vu.nl> Date: 20 Jun 88 16:39:02 GMT References: <19345@watmath.waterloo.edu> <1302@ark.cs.vu.nl> <4599@haddock.ISC.COM> Reply-To: maart@cs.vu.nl (Maarten Litmaath) Organization: VU Informatica, Amsterdam Lines: 19 In article <4599@haddock.ISC.COM> karl@haddock.ima.isc.com (Karl Heuer) writes: \In article <1302@ark.cs.vu.nl> maart@cs.vu.nl (Maarten Litmaath) writes: \>Why use trigraphs if digraphs are available? \> [ = .( \> ] = .) \ \Sorry, but ".)" is already a valid sequence in C code: x=cos(1.) My mistake, sorry indeed. \If you're going to followup with an improved proposal, please note that there \are nine characters ( #[\]^{|}~ ) to be handled. The only digraph solutions I can think of, are the use of '$', '`' or '@'; however, isn't it strange that the latter, being such a wierd character, is supposed to be available on every terminal? -- South-Africa: |Maarten Litmaath @ Free U Amsterdam: revival of the Third Reich |maart@cs.vu.nl, mcvax!botter!ark!maart