Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!paperboy!hsdndev!cmcl2!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: ANSI C standard library
Message-ID: <16014@smoke.brl.mil>
Date: 30 Apr 91 16:48:48 GMT
References: <1991Apr20.092845.14164@watdragon.waterloo.edu> <681@taumet.com> <307@nazgul.UUCP>
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, APG, MD.
Lines: 20

In article <307@nazgul.UUCP> bright@nazgul.UUCP (Walter Bright) writes:
-In article <681@taumet.com> steve@taumet.com (Stephen Clamage) writes:
-/Can you name any other functions in the standard C library which
-/cannot reasonably be written in strictly-conforming C.
-	malloc and friends, because implementation dependent details
-	about pointer alignment need to be known.
-	Any stdio functions, because they need to call operating system
-	functions which aren't part of ANSI C.
-	Any other functions which interface to the operating system,
-	like time().
-	Transcendental functions could be implemented, but would be
-	inaccurate and slow if the mechanics of the underlying
-	floating point were not taken advantage of.
-	The startup code.
-	The ctype.h functions, because they need to know if the
-	implementation is ascii or some other scheme.
-	The stdarg.h functionality.

With the possible exception of the startup code, all the above can
be reasonably written in strictly-conforming C in most environments.