home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!sun-barr!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!mips!darwin.sura.net!convex!news.utdallas.edu!corpgate!crchh327!davisonj
- From: davisonj@bnr.ca (John Davison)
- Newsgroups: comp.std.c
- Subject: Re: ANSI/ISO standard (surprisingly enough!) & extensions
- Summary: will someone answer my question?
- Keywords: ISO ANSI
- Message-ID: <1992Aug18.195516.24881@bnr.ca>
- Date: 18 Aug 92 19:55:16 GMT
- References: <1992Aug18.020102.2965@unix.brighton.ac.uk>
- Sender: news@bnr.ca (News on crchh327)
- Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Richardson, Tx.
- Lines: 31
- Nntp-Posting-Host: crchh7ab
-
-
- I asked this question before, and no one answered. Here it comes
- again. Surely one of you readers knows the answer!
-
- Despite the differences in wording and formatting, are _ISO/IEC_
- _9899:1990_(E),_First_Edition_1990-12-15_ and _American_National_Standard_
- _X3.159-1989_ different in any way with respect to the language specifications
- or implications thereof?
-
- Do these two documents represent the most current and widespread C
- standard(s)?
-
- Please tell me if the following statement is true: The C programming
- language as defined by _ISO/IEC_9899:1990_(E),_First_Edition_1990-12-15_, the C
- programming language as defined by _American_National_Standard_X3.159-1989_,
- ISO C, and ANSI C are all one and the same thing, with no differences
- whatsoever.
-
- If not true, what are the differences (the major ones, anyway)?
-
- Followup articles are encouraged. (Electronic mail is hard for me to
- access.)
-
- Thanks!
-
-
- --
- NOTE: I CAN'T SEND/RECEIVE E-MAIL HERE!!! Use --> davisonj@ecn.purdue.edu <--
- During (roughly) August 20-25, I will be in transit. Please be patient.
- The opinions and other information contained herein are not necessarily
- representative of Northern Telecom or any of its subsidiaries.
-