Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #386205
| From | Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: Good hash for pointers |
| Date | 2024-06-18 16:17 -0700 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <86sex9j0ww.fsf@linuxsc.com> (permalink) |
| References | (15 earlier) <20240606110009.00001096@yahoo.com> <86zfrkj93b.fsf@linuxsc.com> <20240617123926.00006a12@yahoo.com> <86ed8ujg7j.fsf@linuxsc.com> <87bk3xzyi4.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> |
Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes: > Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> writes: > >> Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes: >> >>> On Mon, 17 Jun 2024 00:56:40 -0700 >>> Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> wrote: >>> >>>> I don't know why you say that. C was an ANSI standard before it >>>> was an ISO standard. Or is it that you think that the language >>>> Malcolm is intent on using does not conform to C90/C89/ANSI C? >>> >>> All I wanted to point by this comment is that ANSI recognizes ISO/IEC >>> 9899:2018 as their current C Standard and probably will recognize the >>> next ISO C Standard pretty soon. For that reason I think that names like >>> C89 or C90 are preferable (to ANSI C) when we want to refer to this >>> particular variant of the language. >> >> I see. So it isn't that you think "ANSI C" is wrong, just >> that it might be misleading or that C89 or C90 is preferable. >> Personally I would be surprised if someone used "ANSI C" to >> mean anything other than C89/C90, but certainly other people >> could have a different reaction. > > [...] I don't necessarily complain when someone uses the phrase > "ANSI C" to mean C89/C90, but I try to avoid it myself in favor > of "C89" or "C90". I'm reminded that gcc accepts the option -ansi as a synonym for the option -std=c90.
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Re: Good hash for pointers Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-06-17 00:56 -0700
Re: Good hash for pointers Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-06-17 12:39 +0300
Re: Good hash for pointers Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-06-18 10:47 -0700
Re: Good hash for pointers Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-06-18 15:17 -0700
Re: Good hash for pointers Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-06-18 16:17 -0700
Re: Good hash for pointers James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-06-18 19:23 -0400
Re: Good hash for pointers Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-06-18 17:17 -0700
Re: Good hash for pointers Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-06-23 11:23 -0700
csiph-web