Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wasatch!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!ficc!peter
From: peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: Inappropriate topics.
Message-ID: <5780@ficc.uu.net>
Date: 18 Aug 89 13:37:52 GMT
References: <148@trigon.UUCP> <207600029@s.cs.uiuc.edu> <941@lakesys.UUCP> <28442@watmath.waterloo.edu>
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Lines: 17

In article <28442@watmath.waterloo.edu>, rbutterworth@watmath.waterloo.edu (Ray Butterworth) writes:
[POSIX is an operating system, and not relevant to the C language standard]

That's basically what I said. The problem is that a frequent response
to "why isn't X in X3J11" is "Look in P1003.*, it's in there". The fact
that something is in POSIX isn't really relevant. POSIX is not intended
to fill in he gaps in the C standard. It's an OS standard, not an OS
interface standard (well, it is that too... just not a very portable one).

If we want an interface standard that goes beyond X3J11 without mandating
UNIX, we're going to have to make one ourselves. POSIX is a good starting
point and source of ideas, but no more than that.
-- 
Peter da Silva, *NIX support guy @ Ferranti International Controls Corporation.
Biz: peter@ficc.uu.net, +1 713 274 5180. Fun: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com. `-_-'
"Optimization is not some mystical state of grace, it is an intricate act   U
   of human labor which carries real costs and real risks." -- Tom Neff