Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!nntp.eternal-september.org!.POSTED.mailhub.linuxsc.com!not-for-mail From: Tim Rentsch Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: do { quit; } else { } Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2026 09:15:38 -0800 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Message-ID: <867bt3kmdh.fsf@linuxsc.com> References: <8634enhcui.fsf@linuxsc.com> <86jz6r1cf5.fsf@linuxsc.com> <87r00yeqyo.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="mailhub.linuxsc.com:45.79.96.183"; logging-data="3936935"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:SuN7HLBtDhWDvL5D/d/tDmTaWZA= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:396491 Keith Thompson writes: > Tim Rentsch writes: > >> Wuns Haerst writes: >> [...] >> >>> I think Thiago's idea is brilliant. He should become a >>> member of the standardization committee. He's welcome >>> to post suggestions like this here. >> >> If someone wants to propose a revision or addition to the >> ISO C standard, the appropriate newsgroup in which to post >> it is comp.std.c, not comp.lang.c. > > Perhaps, but comp.std.c has no official status with the ISO C > committee. I don't know if any of its members even read it. I expect none do, but that has no bearing on my comment. > Personally, I'm no longer picky about the division between > comp.lang.c and comp.std.c. Besides being more faithful to the respective charters, it's better to steer discussions of changes or additions to the C standard to comp.std.c for several reasons, the most important of which are one, the quality of the discussion is likely to be higher, and two, the quantity of irrelevant noise is likely to be lower (and that helps comp.lang.c as well as comp.std.c).