home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: mail2news.demon.co.uk!genesis.demon.co.uk
- From: Lawrence Kirby <fred@genesis.demon.co.uk>
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
- Subject: Re: H&S4 errata?
- Date: Thu, 04 Apr 96 22:05:55 GMT
- Organization: none
- Message-ID: <828655555snz@genesis.demon.co.uk>
- References: <4is2p9INNgag@keats.ugrad.cs.ubc.ca> <3152CFAB.32FF@oc.com> <4j4lh0INNgf9@anvil.ugrad.cs.ubc.ca> <DovxAL.4L3@eskimo.com> <828146367snz@genesis.demon.co.uk> <315D995D.2745@oc.com> <828446804snz@genesis.demon.co.uk> <31616C52.79BC@oc.com>
- Reply-To: fred@genesis.demon.co.uk
- X-NNTP-Posting-Host: genesis.demon.co.uk
- X-Newsreader: Demon Internet Simple News v1.27
- X-Mail2News-Path: genesis.demon.co.uk
-
- In article <31616C52.79BC@oc.com> lfw@oc.com "Larry Weiss" writes:
-
- >That's one of my larger fears; that somehow, Schildt has a monopoly on the
- >publication of the text of the C standard. If that were found to be true
- >I'd say it would be time to retire ANSI from the process of C language
- >standardization.
-
- It would certainly be foolish for ANSI to limit themselves like that.
-
- >Apparently ANSI is malleable enough to have allowed the fruits of the Ada
- >language standardization process under their label to be freely distributable.
- >
- >In the best case, maybe someone with influence could cut the same deal for C.
-
- As I understand it it was the US Defence Department (or whatever you call
- it) which had the clout to insist on this for ADA. It might make a precedent
- though. It probably depends on how much the standards organisations depend
- on document sales for funding.
-
- --
- -----------------------------------------
- Lawrence Kirby | fred@genesis.demon.co.uk
- Wilts, England | 70734.126@compuserve.com
- -----------------------------------------
-