Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!utastro!nather
From: nather@utastro.UUCP (Ed Nather)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: C, and what it is for
Message-ID: <3169@utastro.UUCP>
Date: 25 Sep 88 17:35:09 GMT
References: <8809092242.AA20696@BOEING.COM> <1988Sep22.163950.13700@utzoo.uucp> <8578@smoke.ARPA>
Organization: U. Texas, Astronomy, Austin, TX
Lines: 17

In article <8578@smoke.ARPA>, gwyn@smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn ) writes:
> >In article <1988Sep22.163950.13700@utzoo.uucp>, henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes:
> >> Sensible standards committees focus on standardizing existing, well-proven
> >> practice, not on redesigning the language to try to make everybody happy.
> 
> X3J11 will have to decide whether or not trigraphs, some alternative
> similar facility, or no such facility will be in the next draft of the
> proposed ANS for C.  There are pending public review comments on this.

If they follow Henry's excellent advice, "no such facility" is the only
choice.  There is no "well-proven practice" to standardize.

-- 
Ed Nather
Astronomy Dept, U of Texas @ Austin
{backbones}!{noao,ut-sally}!utastro!nather
nather@astro.as.utexas.edu