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