home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
NetNews Offline 2
/
NetNews Offline Volume 2.iso
/
news
/
comp
/
std
/
c
/
528
< prev
next >
Wrap
Internet Message Format
|
1996-08-06
|
1KB
Path: teal.csn.net!not-for-mail
From: thads@csn.net (Thad Smith)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.std.c
Subject: Re: Coding Standards are ignorant
Date: 8 Mar 1996 08:15:08 -0700
Organization: T3 Systems
Message-ID: <gK8PxQ9yt1oB084yn@csn.net>
References: <4gum82$14v4@info4.rus.uni-stuttgart.de>
<1996Mar403.23.06.8316@koobera.math.uic.edu> <4he37i$a0u@solutions.solon.com>
<4hf9m1$fp8@fg70.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de> <4hfecl$33t@solutions.solon.com>
<KANZE.96Mar5131710@slsvgqt.lts.sel.alcatel.de> <danpop.826218405@rscernix>
Reply-To: ThadSmith@acm.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: 199.117.27.22
In article <danpop.826218405@rscernix>, danpop@mail.cern.ch (Dan Pop) wrote:
>I think that the point is missed by both Thomas and James. Everybody
>agrees that the C standard is the ISO one. However, the name that caught
>on is _ANSI_ C whether we Europeans like it or not.
I feel a little silly stating the obvious, but it was the ANSI
committee that actually developed the standard. ISO renumbered
sections, dropped the Rationale, and put their number on the front.
I'm sure that's slighting ISO somewhat, but the fact remains that the
ANSI committee is the one that actually wrote the standard. Why
shouldn't they get some informal credit?
Thad