Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!lll-winken!uunet!aussie!rex
From: rex@aussie.UUCP (Rex Jaeschke)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: New US Rep to ISO C
Message-ID: <15.UUL1.3#5077@aussie.UUCP>
Date: 27 Apr 89 17:29:33 GMT
References: <10143@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Organization: Journal of C Language Translation
Lines: 20

> >Considering that most of ANSI voting members are implementers and the
> >whole area of trigraphs is something most of them don't care a hoot about ...
> 
> Hey, trigraphs are too an issue for implementors; they have to support
> them.  (And I'm not even an implementor, at least not most of the time.)

Sure they care 'cos they have to implement them. What I meant was, 
that most of them are not interested in selling to the marketplaces 
where trigraphs are needed. As such they would rather trigraphs not 
exist at all. They will begrudgingly implement them but not be too 
enthusiastic about it. They will even ship product with __STDC__ set to 
1 without having trigraph support (as vendors are already doing).

Rex

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rex Jaeschke     | C Users Journal     |  Journal of C Language Translation
(703) 860-0091   | DEC PROFESSIONAL    |1810 Michael Faraday Drive, Suite 101
uunet!aussie!rex | Programmers Journal |     Reston, Virginia 22090, USA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------