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