Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ames!oliveb!apple!vsi1!bitbug
From: bitbug@vicom.COM (James Buster)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Max line length (was Re: programming challenge ...)
Summary: C limits, dpANS question
Keywords: C limits dpANS
Message-ID: <1574@vicom.COM>
Date: 18 Mar 89 23:36:20 GMT
References: <2102@jasper.UUCP> <207600017@s.cs.uiuc.edu> <9777@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> <1166@auspex.UUCP> <3072@nunki.usc.edu> <2314@buengc.BU.EDU> <2322@buengc.BU.EDU>
Reply-To: bitbug@vicom.COM (James Buster)
Organization: Vicom Systems, Inc.
Lines: 20

I have a question on how the dpANS words its descriptions of limits.
Are they worded as:
	"The implementation shall accept *a maximum of*.."
or
	"The implementation shall accept *at least*..."

It seems to me that the second wording is far superior, in
that if I create an implementation that has no explicit limits other
than those imposed by available virtual memory (for example), I can still
be dpANS compliant, rather than be forced to saddle my implementation
with silly limits. Of course, if you write a program that exceeds
one of those limits, it is still non-portable, but my implementation
can still properly translate it. I would appreciate flames to the contrary :-)

--------------------------------------------
	     James Buster
	Mad Hacker Extraordinaire
    	...!ames!vsi1!bitbug
	   bitbug@vicom.com
--------------------------------------------