Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Path: utzoo!henry
From: henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Reserved identifiers, was Re: Thoughts on moving towards ANSI
Message-ID: <1989Feb13.191147.24579@utzoo.uucp>
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
References: <795@n8emr.UUCP> <9621@smoke.BRL.MIL> <23551@watmath.waterloo.edu> <490@madnix.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 89 19:11:47 GMT

In article <490@madnix.UUCP> glasser@madnix.UUCP (Daniel Glasser) writes:
>I'm not saying that there should not be a standard for the library, just
>that it should be its own standard.

Why?  For most applications the two go together anyway -- C is rather more
dependent on its library than a lot of other languages.

>There are some environments where the full-blown standard library is
>inappropriate or impossible...

Hence the provisions for "non-hosted" implementations.

>... With the advent of common object file format
>standards, libraries may be purchased from vendors other than the
>compiler vendor...

Ho ho ha ha ho ho.  At present there is roughly one "common object file
format" per machine, although there are some small signs of progress.
Don't forget that you need common calling conventions and common system-
call conventions as well.

Also, a really good library is tied in with the compiler, since things
like memcpy() are best implemented by the compiler, not as normal library
functions.
-- 
The Earth is our mother;       |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
our nine months are up.        | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu