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