home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: news.nyu.edu!schonberg!dewar
- From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.edu
- Subject: Re: ANSI C and POSIX (was Re: C/C++ knocks the crap out of Ada)
- Date: 6 Apr 1996 22:04:36 -0500
- Organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences
- Message-ID: <dewar.828846122@schonberg>
- References: <JSA.96Feb16135027@organon.com> <emery-0204960656230001@line030.nwm.mindlink.net> <828632277snz@genesis.demon.co.uk> <dewar.828704810@schonberg> <4k3utg$ndp@solutions.solon.com> <dewar.828757752@schonberg> <828825929snz@genesis.demon.co.uk>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: schonberg.cs.nyu.edu
- X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 (NOV)
-
- "Well, POSIX is IEEE standard 1003. I don't think SPEC1170 and XPG are
- national/international standards but are something you have to conform to
- if you want to call your OS UNIX(tm).
- "
-
- This is plain wrong! There are lots of unixes out there that call themselves
- UNIX and do not conform exactly to SPEC1170.
-
- Consider for example, also answering your question about ANSI being
- a misleadng guide to portability, the return type of sprintf. I don't
- have SPEC1170 on hand, but it is a good guess that it is ANSI compliant
- here (return type int), but BSD heritage unices (like SunOS) return
- char *.
-
- "have to conform to"
-
- and prey who enforces this rule?
-
-