Groups > comp.lang.c > #62081

Re: C struct compatibility when they have the same initial members

From	Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c
Subject	Re: C struct compatibility when they have the same initial members
Date	2015-05-15 15:27 -0700
Organization	None to speak of
Message-ID	<87zj55a330.fsf@kst-u.example.com> (permalink)
References	(1 earlier) <mivtsj$8bt$1@dont-email.me> <mj1hci$g6h$1@dont-email.me> <mj3s2a$m42$1@dont-email.me> <mj5l3i$22e$1@dont-email.me> <55566111.1000501@verizon.net>

Show all headers | View raw

James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> writes:
[...]
>>> On 05/14/2015 03:04 AM, James Harris wrote:
[...]
>>>> I have been using
>>>>
>>>>   http://port70.net/~nsz/c/c89/c89-draft.html
[...]
> Then why are you using a draft standard? The draft differs from the
> final standard in a number of ways (I don't know the details), and those
> differences are NOT part of the "lowest common denominator".
[...]

The original C89 or C90 standard might not be easily available.  I don't
see it at webstore.ansi.org.

I have a PDF copy of the ISO C90 standard (I think I paid $18 for it),
but it's a very poor copy (no index, and the PDF was scanned from a
paper copy).

If you can find a copy of Schildt's "The Annotated ANSI C Standard"
(which I think is out of print), it includes the text of the C90
standard on the left-hand pages, though one page is missing.

WARNING: The right-hand pages consist of Schildt's annotations, which
are literally worse than useless.  Every copy of this book should be
accompanied by a printout of "The Annotated Annotated C Standard" by
Clive Feather, <http://www.lysator.liu.se/c/schildt.html>.

A pre-C89 draft might be good enough for most purposes.  Another
alternative is the N1256 C99 draft, which includes a foreword
summarizing the changes from C90 to C99.

-- 
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"

Thread

C struct compatibility when they have the same initial members "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-05-13 11:31 +0100
  Re: C struct compatibility when they have the same initial members Johann Klammer <klammerj@NOSPAM.a1.net> - 2015-05-13 17:17 +0200
  Re: C struct compatibility when they have the same initial members James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-05-13 12:25 -0400
    Re: C struct compatibility when they have the same initial members Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-05-14 14:33 +1200
    Re: C struct compatibility when they have the same initial members "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-05-14 08:04 +0100
      Re: C struct compatibility when they have the same initial members James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-05-15 00:19 -0400
        Re: C struct compatibility when they have the same initial members "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-05-15 21:32 +0100
          Re: C struct compatibility when they have the same initial members James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-05-15 17:11 -0400
            Re: C struct compatibility when they have the same initial members Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-15 15:27 -0700
  Re: C struct compatibility when they have the same initial members Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2015-05-13 11:22 -0700
  Re: C struct compatibility when they have the same initial members pa@see.signature.invalid (Pierre Asselin) - 2015-05-14 01:33 +0000
    Re: C struct compatibility when they have the same initial members "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-05-14 08:15 +0100
      Re: C struct compatibility when they have the same initial members Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-14 11:22 +0100
        Re: C struct compatibility when they have the same initial members Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-14 11:27 +0100

csiph-web