Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: What constitutes "standard" C? |
| Date | 2015-03-07 16:42 -0800 |
| Organization | None to speak of |
| Message-ID | <87lhj848wb.fsf@kst-u.example.com> (permalink) |
| References | <58082093-9db8-4795-a037-764012b7f76b@googlegroups.com> <mdesv8$4p6$1@speranza.aioe.org> <mdeugs$orp$1@dont-email.me> |
Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes:
[...]
> It may surprise you to learn this, but the subject (of what is topical
> here) has come up before, and the overwhelming consensus was that we
> should stick to ISO C (and, for historical reasons, K&R C). If you
> care enough to do the legwork, you'll find that I myself raised this
> subject some years ago, in the hope of relaxing the limits of
> acceptability somewhat, and I was roundly rebuffed.
[...]
That discussion took place in September 2007, starting with an article
with the subject "Should we broaden the topicality of this group?".
You posted a summary of the results on 2007-10-02, subject "Topicality
discussion - summary".
Looking through my own archives, I see I mentioned this in 2010, and
posted the Google Groups URLs:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.c/browse_frm/thread/306800faf6c30d43/a642808d3bf37773
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.c/browse_frm/thread/32c4358dc0307344/faa1895ecbce478b
I haven't recently re-read that discussion, but my memory of it matches
yours.
As I wrote in 2010:
It's interesting to note that many of those who complain most
loudly about the topicality guidelines being too strict were
participating in the newsgroup at the time, but did not choose
to participate in the discussion.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
What constitutes "standard" C? Chad <cdalten@gmail.com> - 2015-03-06 23:41 -0800
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-03-07 02:57 -0600
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-03-07 02:51 -0800
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-03-07 11:25 +0000
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-03-07 18:34 +0000
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-03-09 11:21 -0400
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-03-09 16:08 +0000
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-03-07 15:07 -0500
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-03-07 11:21 +0000
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-03-07 11:24 -0500
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-03-07 17:09 +0000
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-03-07 12:47 -0500
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-03-07 17:47 -0500
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-03-07 15:43 -0800
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-03-08 01:03 +0000
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-03-07 21:02 -0500
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-03-07 18:51 -0800
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-03-24 16:02 -0700
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-03-25 08:52 -0700
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-03-25 15:55 -0700
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-03-25 16:33 -0700
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-03-27 20:14 +0000
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-03-27 17:19 -0700
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-03-27 17:30 -0700
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-03-28 14:27 -0700
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-03-28 20:43 -0700
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-04-04 12:15 -0700
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-04-05 01:13 +0000
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-04-05 13:43 -0400
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-04-05 20:14 +0000
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-04-05 13:28 -0700
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-04-05 17:56 -0400
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Lőrinczy Zsigmond <nospam@for.me> - 2015-03-07 14:03 +0100
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-03-07 13:30 +0000
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-03-07 14:42 +0000
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-03-07 08:33 -0800
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-03-07 18:53 -0500
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-03-07 16:42 -0800
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-03-07 15:49 -0800
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-03-07 05:13 -0800
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2015-03-07 15:35 +0000
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2015-03-07 10:49 -0500
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2015-03-07 10:52 -0500
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-03-07 11:21 -0500
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-03-07 17:10 -0800
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-03-09 11:32 -0400
csiph-web