Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!psuvax1!hsdndev!cmcl2!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Why didn't ANSI make initialisation consistent ????
Message-ID: <15974@smoke.brl.mil>
Date: 25 Apr 91 21:47:01 GMT
References: <1991Apr24.141206.18103@grep.co.uk>
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, APG, MD.
Lines: 11

In article <1991Apr24.141206.18103@grep.co.uk> vic@grep.co.uk (Victor Gavin) writes:
>Could anyone tell me whether the ANSI committee pondered over the problem of
>tidying up the inconsistencies of the C initializations ?

I doubt that we would have considered proposals for changing those
long-established parts of the C language that you described, for
any longer than it would take to unanimously reject them.  The
charter of X3J11 did not include redesigning the language, rather
merely standardizing existing practice and addressing perceived
significant deficiencies.  Well-established existing correct
practice had to continue to be permitted.