Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #402231
| Path | csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!nntp.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail |
|---|---|
| From | Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: Trolling the standard thumpers |
| Date | Fri, 18 Sep 2026 08:22:45 -0700 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Lines | 32 |
| Message-ID | <86v782twhm.fsf@linuxsc.com> (permalink) |
| References | <2qLfS.354537$aXr.31321@fx18.ams4> <20260910110112.37@kylheku.com> |
| MIME-Version | 1.0 |
| Content-Type | text/plain; charset=us-ascii |
| Injection-Date | Fri, 18 Sep 2026 15:22:48 +0000 (UTC) |
| Injection-Info | dont-email.me; logging-data="1476949"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/YDG9wFHUloeLJYPdQVRwYmLkY/b/4UO4="; posting-host="742ba13f59dd80260e7d5d77f8995b11" |
| User-Agent | Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux) |
| Cancel-Lock | sha1:C5WJNQWAxHjvwXC8KURc3am9Lpg= sha1:whhkUnXTIRdYsryDUponxmcLiss= sha256:d0VhNkdBrGk67iacdLnlSu5J38fGfINo68hF1PPsQUk= sha1:Ll72jObMblDB73bCq3UIoCebnZs= sha256:c1GWCaaqyI4w6Pxr8uvsYVaEjvA7IGR9KDswFSs+ZKI= |
| Xref | csiph.com comp.lang.c:402231 |
Show key headers only | View raw
Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> writes:
> On 2026-08-14,
> Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Dear comp.lang.c,
>>
>> Because I believe the standard thumpers have trolled us quite well
>> for way too long, I'm asking quite casually, if this is a conformant
>> implementation of printf()?
>>
>> int printf( const char *format, ... ) {
>> errno = ENOTTY ;
>> return -1 ;
>> }
>
> The proper question is, could an implementation be conforming if that
> were its implementation of printf?
>
> Right of the bat, the implementation could be a conforming freestanding
> implementation, due to freestanding implementations not being required
> to implement stdio.
>
> Could it be a conforming hosted implementation? I'm afraid the answer
> is yes, due to the way conformance is defined.
Such things have been known for more than 30 years. The bar for
being a conforming implementation is intentionally very low. Any
questions like this one are seen a quality-of-implementation
matters rather than one of conformance. The original C standard
group made this choice knowingly and deliberately, and in my view
correctly.
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Trolling the standard thumpers Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-15 05:05 +0800
Re: Trolling the standard thumpers Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2026-09-10 20:06 +0000
Re: Trolling the standard thumpers Lane W <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-10 14:14 -0600
Re: Trolling the standard thumpers fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 22:33 +0200
Re: Trolling the standard thumpers Lane W <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-10 15:03 -0600
Re: Trolling the standard thumpers fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-11 13:49 +0200
Re: Trolling the standard thumpers fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-11 13:55 +0200
Re: Trolling the standard thumpers Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 14:25 -0700
Re: Trolling the standard thumpers Lane W <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-10 15:33 -0600
Re: Trolling the standard thumpers David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-11 09:37 +0200
Re: Trolling the standard thumpers fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-11 14:00 +0200
Re: Trolling the standard thumpers Lane W <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-11 07:18 -0600
Re: Trolling the standard thumpers Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-09-18 08:22 -0700
Re: Trolling the standard thumpers BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 15:56 -0500
csiph-web