bit masking

[Keith Thompson]

Flash Gordon wrote: [...]

3) Think about why it might say ANSI rather than ISO
4) Consider the fact that you are far more likely to use a compiler that
can properly support (modulo bugs) C89 and C99.

[...]
1) I wasn't complaining. I feel like I'm in Sunday school with the five
books of Moses containing two different sequences of the creation story, and
I can't get anyone to admit that one isn't right.

Neither C90 nor C99 is "wrong". The C90 standard describes a version
of the C language; the C99 standard describes a later version of the C
language. Both are correct (modulo some minor internal
inconsistencies), even though they differ from each other. They're
not variant attempts to describe some common external reality, they're
definitions of two different things. (Comparison to creation stories
is left as an exercise.)

[...]

3) At the risk of sounding stupid, I don't know the difference.

See section 11 of the C FAQ, particularly 11.1, at
<http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>. The HTML version is out
of date, but there's a more recent gzipped text version at

4) Please explain.

I think he meant to say that "you are far more likely to use a
compiler that can properly support (modulo bugs) C89 *than* C99".
Most current C compilers support the C89/C90 standard. Many support
some C99 features, but few support the entire standard. Because of
this, code that depends on C99 features cannot (yet) be considered
portable.

 

[Keith Thompson]

2. The *only* C standard ever produced by ANSI is C89. Therefore, the
book cover is telling the truth.

It's certainly telling the truth as of the publication date.

But ANSI, as I understand it, has since then officially adopted the
ISO C99 standard as an ANSI standard. (Please correct me if I'm
mistaken.)

The meaning of the term "ANSI C" has to be inferred from the context,
though it still most commonly refers to C89/C90. That's why it's
important to refer specifically to C89/C90 or to C99.

 

[CBFalconer]

:
.... snip ...

When I buy a book in anno Domini 2004 with a huge ANSI stamp on
the front of it, I expect it to be relevant to the time on my
receipt. I did not purchase a historical tour.

FYI, when you open almost any book, you will find both a copyright
and a printing date somewhere near the beginning. Read them. They
usually give a fairly accurate picture of the context for which the
book was written.

If you have appreciated that, you should also appreciate that K&R2
remains the best, most comprehensive, and most accurate
introduction to the C language available today. You should get the
errata from <some URL involving DMR>. If you want perfection, get
married.

 

[Mark McIntyre]

When I buy a book in anno Domini 2004 with a huge ANSI stamp on the front of
it, I expect it to be relevant to the time on my receipt. I did not
purchase a historical tour.

So... let me get this straight: You expect all books you buy to be recently
revised and re-edited?

Bizarre.

The insinuation that I'm greedy will pass without comment.

The only insinuation is in yuor mind.

Agreed. Since you seem not to know what the idiom means. MPJ

Well, I have no clue either. And I also don't want to.

 

[Keith Thompson]

If you have appreciated that, you should also appreciate that K&R2
remains the best, most comprehensive, and most accurate
introduction to the C language available today. You should get the
errata from <some URL involving DMR>. If you want perfection, get
married.

<http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/cbook/2ediffs.html>

 

[Merrill & Michele]

Keith wrote:
It's certainly telling the truth as of the publication date.

But ANSI, as I understand it, has since then officially adopted the
ISO C99 standard as an ANSI standard. (Please correct me if I'm
mistaken.)

The meaning of the term "ANSI C" has to be inferred from the context,
though it still most commonly refers to C89/C90. That's why it's
important to refer specifically to C89/C90 or to C99.

Mr. Thompson is the undeniable voice of moderation around here. I do not
spoil for a fight, unless it's chicago-style Feit-Thompson. Let's let this
go. MPJ

 

[Merrill & Michele]

Chuck wrote:
FYI, when you open almost any book, you will find both a copyright
and a printing date somewhere near the beginning. Read them. They
usually give a fairly accurate picture of the context for which the
book was written.

If you have appreciated that, you should also appreciate that K&R2
remains the best, most comprehensive, and most accurate
introduction to the C language available today. You should get the
errata from <some URL involving DMR>. If you want perfection, get
married.

The only thing I'd bet on with respect to you is that you're single. (Not
to be understood as a pejorative.) MPJ

 

[Merrill & Michele]

"Mark McIntyre" wrote:
So... let me get this straight: You expect all books you buy to be recently
revised and re-edited?

Bizarre.

Don't talk to me about books, asswipe.

The only insinuation is in yuor mind.

Spell, fuckwad.

Mr. Bos isn't a fan of mine, and not many people are. He might have a
disadvantage that you don't, but one of them isn't the following two
sentences:

Well, I have no clue either. And I also don't want to.

Agreed. MPJ

 

[Richard Bos]

When I buy a book in anno Domini 2004 with a huge ANSI stamp on the front of
it, I expect it to be relevant to the time on my receipt.

Then you cannot understand much of publishing.

The operative term in my query was the present tense use of the linking
verb: is.

Yes. It is. It is perfectly conforming to the Standard the book uses.

The insinuation that I'm greedy will pass without comment.

Hey, you brought the price up in the first place.

Agreed. Since you seem not to know what the idiom means. MPJ

Oh, I know what it means all right. In fact, I've seen it used in
several contexts, from "making a hash of things" to "mentioning a
problem". What I can't figure out is how you plan to use it in the
context of K&R and implementations.

Richard

 

[CBFalconer]

.... snip ...

The only thing I'd bet on with respect to you is that you're single.
(Not to be understood as a pejorative.) MPJ

You'd be wrong. Bear in mind, the entity being perfected is you,
with varying degrees of success. After that, your daughters take
over.

 

[CBFalconer]

Don't talk to me about books, asswipe.

.... snip further crudities ...

On the chance that someone is stealing your identity, we will
forbear plonking for the moment. This is the sort of thing that
leaves you out in the cold talking to yourself.

 

[Dan Pop]

(e-mail address removed) (Dan Pop) writes:
[...]

2. The *only* C standard ever produced by ANSI is C89. Therefore, the
book cover is telling the truth.

It's certainly telling the truth as of the publication date.

But ANSI, as I understand it, has since then officially adopted the
ISO C99 standard as an ANSI standard. (Please correct me if I'm
mistaken.)

You *are* mistaken: ANSI approved the usage of the ISO standard as an
American National Standard. This doesn't make it an ANSI standard:
the reference number of the document published by ANSI is
ISO/IEC 9899:1999(E). Compare to ANSI X3.159-1989, the reference number
of the C89 standard.

The meaning of the term "ANSI C" has to be inferred from the context,
though it still most commonly refers to C89/C90. That's why it's
important to refer specifically to C89/C90 or to C99.

Nope, the meaning of the term "ANSI C" is context-free, as there is
exactly one C standard produced by ANSI. "ISO C" is an ambiguous name,
because there are three versions of the C language produced by ISO.

Dan

 

[Merrill & Michele]

[snips all crudities]

On the chance that someone is stealing your identity, we will
forbear plonking for the moment. This is the sort of thing that
leaves you out in the cold talking to yourself.

I wish I could hide behind identity theft for that post. I was in a
horrible mood and apologize to Mr. Mcintyre in particular and the rest of
the forum as well. MPJ

 

[Mark McIntyre]

Don't talk to me about books, asswipe.

Ok, I won't. But in that case, why start a conversation about them?

Spell, fuckwad.

ok, F. U. C. K. W. A. D.
How'd I do?

 

[Mark McIntyre]

I wish I could hide behind identity theft for that post. I was in a
horrible mood and apologize to Mr. Mcintyre in particular and the rest of
the forum as well. MPJ

Fair enough. Accepted.