Quoth Nadav Har'El on Tue, Mar 25, 2003:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2003, Vadim Vygonets wrote about "Re: ANSI C":
> > A publically available draft from August 3, 1998:
>
> Well, I suppose this cannot be a draft of a standard that was defined over
> 8 years earlier... :)
Stranger things have happened.
> I suppose it is a draft of a newer standard (?) called
> C9X. When people speak of ANSI C, they don't normally refer to C9X. If you
> want your programs to be very portable, you better not rely on C9X extensions.
"ANSI C" is ISO C for more than a decade now, and the latest(?)
version is C99, slightly over 3 years old now, so I argue that
C99 is the Standard C today, and this reference is more relevant
today than that to the older version of the standard. Also, the
discussed piece of code doesn't use any C99 "extensions", as you
put it, so theoretically the standard should be the same in both
versions.
Vadik.
--
If you think C++ is not overly complicated, just what is a protected
abstract virtual base pure virtual private destructor, and when
was the last time you needed one?
-- Tom Cargill, C++ Journal, Fall 1990.
=================================================================
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
