documenting multiple standards

2015-10-25 Thread Anthony J. Bentley
>From wcrtomb(3): The wcrtomb() function conforms to ISO/IEC 9899/AMD1:1995 (``ISO C90, Amendment 1''). The restrict qualifier is added at ISO/IEC 9899/1999 (``ISO C99''). This wording is confusing. Is it implying that we don't use a restrict qualifier? (We do.) If a standard

Re: documenting multiple standards

2015-10-25 Thread Philip Guenther
On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 12:58 AM, Anthony J. Bentley wrote: > From wcrtomb(3): > > The wcrtomb() function conforms to ISO/IEC 9899/AMD1:1995 (``ISO C90, > Amendment 1''). The restrict qualifier is added at ISO/IEC 9899/1999 > (``ISO C99''). > > This wording is

Re: documenting multiple standards

2015-10-25 Thread Jason McIntyre
On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 01:58:21AM -0600, Anthony J. Bentley wrote: > >From wcrtomb(3): > > The wcrtomb() function conforms to ISO/IEC 9899/AMD1:1995 (``ISO C90, > Amendment 1''). The restrict qualifier is added at ISO/IEC 9899/1999 > (``ISO C99''). > > This wording is confusing.

Re: documenting multiple standards

2015-10-25 Thread Theo de Raadt
>>From wcrtomb(3): > > The wcrtomb() function conforms to ISO/IEC 9899/AMD1:1995 (``ISO C90, > Amendment 1''). The restrict qualifier is added at ISO/IEC 9899/1999 > (``ISO C99''). > >This wording is confusing. Is it implying that we don't use a restrict >qualifier? (We do.) > >If a