Re: Differences between 'const char' and 'char'
From: j (jakeFOO30_at_bellsouth.net)
Date: 10/02/03
- Next message: Neil Cerutti: "Re: Monty Hall simulator: is there a better way to do this?"
- Previous message: Charles Harrison Caudill: "Re: Preprocessor directive"
- In reply to: Richard Heathfield: "Re: Differences between 'const char' and 'char'"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2003 12:25:37 -0700
"Richard Heathfield" <dontmail@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote in message
news:blhm1v$96h$1@sparta.btinternet.com...
> Ben Pfaff wrote:
>
> > Noah Roberts <nroberts@dontemailme.com> writes:
> >
> >> Since I am unfamiliar with C99 (only ansi)
> >
> > C99 *is* an ANSI standard.
>
> Just for the sake of completeness:
>
> In 1999, ISO ratified ISO/IEC 9899:1999 as a replacement for ISO/IEC
> 9899:1990. It was not until 2000 that ANSI adopted this standard, so I
> suppose we ought really to say that C99 is an ISO standard, and C2000 (or,
> for those who have already forgotten Y2K, perhaps C00) is perhaps a more
> accurate name for the new ANSI standard. (They are, however, effectively
> the same standard, so IMHO Ben was quite within his rights to say that C99
> is an ANSI standard. I am expanding his statement, rather than correcting
> it.)
>
It is noted on the ANSI webstore that c99 is formerly known
as ISO/IEC/ANSI 9899:1999 and is now known as
ISO/IEC/INCITS 9899:1999
So referring to it as ANSI is not entirely correct
Even though INCITS operates under ANSI
it would be more correct to refer to the actual groups
that are responsible for the standard.
Which is: ISO/IEC/INCITS
> Implementors' uptake for this new standard has been slow. For maximum
> portability, C programmers would be well advised to work within the common
> subset of C90 and C99 as far as possible.
>
>
> --
> Richard Heathfield : binary@eton.powernet.co.uk
> "Usenet is a strange place." - Dennis M Ritchie, 29 July 1999.
> C FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
> K&R answers, C books, etc: http://users.powernet.co.uk/eton
- Next message: Neil Cerutti: "Re: Monty Hall simulator: is there a better way to do this?"
- Previous message: Charles Harrison Caudill: "Re: Preprocessor directive"
- In reply to: Richard Heathfield: "Re: Differences between 'const char' and 'char'"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|