Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #169385
| Path | csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail |
|---|---|
| From | Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: Is this safe? |
| Date | Sun, 26 Feb 2023 08:38:07 -0800 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Lines | 38 |
| Message-ID | <86lekk9yc0.fsf@linuxsc.com> (permalink) |
| References | <tt083h$qh3d$1@dont-email.me> <tt1hs1$11hjh$1@dont-email.me> <tt228c$13ftg$1@dont-email.me> <tt2jgo$15erm$1@dont-email.me> <tt2lsl$15ohe$1@dont-email.me> <e84b5538-049b-44fc-be30-2a7625f49503n@googlegroups.com> <tt4n2n$1fp0v$1@dont-email.me> <tt756o$1qfle$1@dont-email.me> <tt7c1d$1r754$1@dont-email.me> <tt7f8f$1rh5j$1@dont-email.me> <tt7ff6$1rj3p$1@dont-email.me> <tt7i6i$1rpb5$1@dont-email.me> <tt82j1$1tivo$1@dont-email.me> <tt83vh$1tk8v$1@dont-email.me> <tt85k9$1tj6h$1@dont-email.me> <UcNJL.102163$eRZ7.2491@fx06.iad> |
| MIME-Version | 1.0 |
| Content-Type | text/plain; charset=us-ascii |
| Injection-Info | reader01.eternal-september.org; posting-host="526989a27dd75bcaca35e6c31d23f3c5"; logging-data="3122097"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18Eb3GII2lhsugX9In5qHmvcKSlTUv1aQY=" |
| User-Agent | Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux) |
| Cancel-Lock | sha1:rORxW0HNuAHbpNCP4m/Xlzv9R3k= sha1:Xn4CF30u/pzi+v1pt7D8dmahuUs= |
| Xref | csiph.com comp.lang.c:169385 |
Show key headers only | View raw
Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> writes: > On 2/23/23 11:52 AM, James Kuyper wrote: >> On 2/23/23 11:24, Paavo Helde wrote: >> >>> [example] >> >> That's non-conforming. >> "The isdigit function tests for any decimal-digit character (as >> defined in 5.2.1)." (7.4.1.5). >> >> "... >> the 10 decimal digits >> 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9" (5.2.1p3) >> >> "digits" is italicized, an ISO convention indicating that this >> constitutes the official definition of that term. [only those >> 10 characters are allowed, not any others.] > > And before that it says (in p1) > > Each set is further divided into a basic character set, whose > contents are given by this subclause, and a set of zero or more > locale-specific members (which are not members of the basic > character set) called extended characters. > > So ALL the categories may have locale specific additions added. > > So, unless a function specifically restricts its classification to > just the "basic character set", there might be extended characters > in the set. You are misreading the meaning here. The phrase "Each set" in section 5.2.1 paragraph 1 refers only to the two sets mentioned in that paragraph, namely, the source character set and the execution character set; it does not refer to the several named collections of characters given in paragraph 3, which collections are not even identified in the C standard as "sets", including in the passages mentioning them in section 7.4.
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Is this safe? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2023-02-23 11:52 -0500
Re: Is this safe? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2023-02-23 12:17 -0500
Re: Is this safe? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2023-02-24 02:05 -0500
Re: Is this safe? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2023-02-26 08:38 -0800
csiph-web