Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!uunet!mcsun!sunic!nuug!ifi!gisle
From: gisle@ifi.uio.no (Gisle Hannemyr)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: ISO DIS 9899
Message-ID: <2551@ifi.uio.no>
Date: 1 Feb 90 10:15:46 GMT
References: <2518@ifi.uio.no> <12030@smoke.BRL.MIL> <1990Jan29.215920.2576@hcr.uucp>
Organization: gisle@ifi.uio.no
Lines: 33
In-reply-to: paul@hcr.uucp's message of 29 Jan 90 21:59:20 GMT

In article <12030@smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn) writes:
>In article <2518@ifi.uio.no> gisle@ifi.uio.no (Gisle Hannemyr) writes:
>>Does anyone know what the relationship is between ISO DIS 9899 and
>>ANS X3.159-1989?
>
>They're supposed to be technically identical, although the British ISO
>WG14 representatives are expected to provide a supplement concerning
>instances of "undefined behavior" that may become part of the IS.

In the january 26, 1990 edition of IDG Communications "ComputerWorld"
(Norwegian edition), there is an article: "C -- ISO or ANSI" on
page 61.  Among other things, it concludes (my translation):

      "It seems that the efforts to create an unified international
   standard for C is diverging in two main factions.  One faction
   will let ISO develop the final C standard, based on the draft
   ANSI standard, the second faction want to publish the ANSI
   draft standard, and continue work on a new ANSI C standard
   to replace the present.  The new ANSI C standard is expected
   to be purged of several strange features that several
   commentators has opinied are present in the draft ANSI
   standard
      The British has commented that they believe that ISO will
   create a more complete specification of C than the present
   ANSI draft"

Is this totally bogus?

- gisle hannemyr  (Norwegian Computing Center)
  EAN:   gisle@nr.uninett
  Inet:  gisle@ifi.uio.no
  UUCP:  ...!mcvax!ifi!gisle
------------------------------------------------